UNIV.  OF  CALIF.  LIBRARY,  LOS  At^^lltt 


UNIV,  OF  CALIF,  LIBRARY,  LOS  ANGEla&b 

Library  of 
ALFKO  W.  m. 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/characterofrenaiOOmooriala 


CHARACTER    OF 
RENAISSANCE   ARCHITECTURE 


^^^^ 


CHARACTER  OF 


Renaissance  Architecture 


BY 


CHARLES  HERBERT  MOORE 

AUTHOR   OF   "  DEVELOPMENT   AND   CHARACTER   OF 
GOTHIC  ARCHITECTURE" 


WITH  TWELVE  PLATES  IN  PHOTOGRAVURE  AND  ONE  HUNDRED 
AND    THIRTY-NINE   ILLUSTRATIONS  IN  THE    TEXT 


THE    MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

LONDON  :   MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  Ltd. 
1905 

Al/  rights  reserved 


Copyright,  1905, 
By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY. 


Set  up  and  electrotyped.     Published  October,  1905. 


NortaiaoD  sprees 

J.  S.  Cashing  &  Co.—  Berwick  &  Smith  Co. 

Norwood,  Mass.,  U.S.A. 


^1  ^tectur*  A 

AJP\ 
3IO 


TO  MY   DAUGHTER 

E.  H.  M. 


PREFACE 

In  the  following  attempt  to  set  forth  the  true  character  of  the 
architecture  of  the  Renaissance  I  have  endeavoured  to  reduce 
mere  descriptions  of  buildings  to  a  minimum,  and  to  give 
graphic  illustrations  enough  to  make  the  discussions  clear. 
The  illustrations  in  the  text  are  mainly  from  my  own  drawings, 
for  the  most  part  from  photographs :  but  in  a  few  cases  I  have 
reproduced  woodcuts  from  the  works  of  old  writers,  indicating, 
in  each  case,  the  source  from  which  the  cut  is  derived.  The 
photogravure  plates  are  from  photographs  by  Alinari,  Moscioni, 
Naya,  Wilson,  and  Valentine.  The  right  to  reproduce  and  pub- 
lish them  has  been  obtained  by  purchase.    ' 

With  the  best  intentions  and  the  greatest  care,  it  is  almost 
inevitable  that  a  writer  on  such  a  subject  should  make  some 
mistakes,  and  I  cannot  affirm  that  no  inexact  statements  will  be 
found  in  these  pages,  but  I  believe  that  no  fundamental  errors 
occur. 

I  am  again  indebted  to  my  almost  hfe-long  friend,  Professor 
Charles  Eliot  Norton,  for  valuable  criticism,  and  painstaking 
revision  ;  but  Professor  Norton  is  not  responsible  for  anything 
that  I  have  said.  I  am  indebted,  also,  to  my  publishers  for  their 
courteous  compliance  with  my  wishes  as  to  the  style  and  manu- 
facture of  the  book,  and  to  Mrs.  Grace  Walden  for  the  care  and 
thoroughness  with  which  she  has  prepared  the  index. 

Cambridge,  Mass., 
October,  1905. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER  I 

Introduction 

Character  of  the  Fine  Arts  of  the  Renaissance  not  hitherto  correctly  set  forth 
—  The  Fine  Arts  always  an  expression  of  the  conditions  and  beliefs  of  a 
people  — Mediaeval  Christianity  as  a  source  of  artistic  inspiration  —  Con- 
ditions that  gave  character  to  the  Fine  Arts  of  the  Middle  Ages  —  Artistic 
productions  of  the  Renaissance  qualified  by  the  immoral  tendencies  of  the 
time  —  Luxury  and  extravagance  of  Florence  at  the  close  of  the  fifteenth 
century  —  The  Fine  Arts  made  to  minister  to  sensuous  pleasure  —  Best 
classic  art  unknown  in  the  Renaissance  time  —  Mixed  influences  actuating 
the  artist  of  the  Renaissance  —  The  Renaissance  and  the  Middle  Ages 
compared  as  to  development  of  the  individual  —  Lack  of  aptitude  for  con- 
struction among  the  architects  of  the  Renaissance  —  The  Italian  genius 
for  painting  —  The  painter's  habits  of  design  shown  in  the  Renaissance 
use  of  the  orders  —  Classification  of  architectural  styles  —  Painting  the 
best  art  of  the  Renaissance  —  Yet  Italian  painting  of  the  sixteenth  century 
is  not  all  of  exemplary  character  —  Best  art  of  the  Renaissance  founded 
on  the  earlier  Christian  art  —  A  retrospective  movement  not  a  vital  force 
in  artistic  development 

CHAPTER   II 

The  Dome  of  Florence 

Exhibits  a  wide  departure  from  older  dome  constructions  —  Sources  of  the 
architect's  inspiration  —  General  character  of  earlier  domes — Remarkable 
construction  of  the  dome  of  the  Florentine  Baptistery  —  It  probably  sup- 
plied the  chief  inspiration  to  both  Arnolfo  and  Brunelleschi  —  Brunelleschi's 
departures  from  the  Baptistery  scheme  —  His  structural  system  and  his  own 
account  of  it  —  No  Gothic  character  possible  in  a  dome  —  The  dome  of 
Florence  a  daring  innovation  —  Its  general  dimensions — Brunelleschi's 
great  ability  as  a  constructor — His  achievement  of  the  work  without  the 
usual  centring  —  Consideration  of  the  dome  as  a  work  of  art  —  The  inhe- 
rent weakness  of  its  form  —  This  not  appreciated  by  the  early  Italian 
writers  —  Precautions  taken  for  its  stability  —  Signs  of  disintegration  — 
Uncertainty  as  to  its  duration  —  Opinions  of  the  early  Italian  writers  as  to 
its  security — Structural  integrity  essential  to  good  architecture  —  No 
classic  character  in  Brunelleschi's  dome  —  Inferior  character  of  the  classic 
details  of  the  lantern  ........... 


X  CONTENTS 

CHAPTER   III 
Church  Architecture  of  the  Florentine  Renaissance 

FAGB 

The  Pazzi  chapel  —  Gothic  character  of  its  central  vault  —  Architectural  treat- 
ment of  the  interior  —  Impropriety  of  a  classic  order  in  such  a  building  — 
Awkward  result  of  an  entablature  passing  through  an  arch  impost  —  Incon- 
gruities of  design  and  construction  in  the  portico  —  Use  of  stucco  — 
Sources  from  which  the  facade  may  have  been  derived  —  Other  church 
architecture  by  Brunelleschi — San  Lorenzo  and  Santo  Spirito  —  Use  of 
the  entablature  block  in  these  churches  —  Survival  of  mediaeval  features 
and  adjustments  —  Church  architecture  of  Leon  Batista  Alberti  —  The 
facade  of  Santa  Maria  Novella  —  The  facade  of  San  Francesco  of  Rimini 
—  The  church  of  Sant'  Andrea  of  Mantua  —  Return  to  Roman  models  in 
the  structural  forms  of  this  building  —  Sant'  Andrea  foreshadows  St.  Peter's 
at  Rome  —  Its  west  front  an  adaptation  of  the  Roman  triumphal  arch 
scheme  —  Such  fronts  peculiar  to  Alberti  —  The  designers  of  the  Renais- 
sance worked  unconsciously  on  a  foundation  of  mediaeval  ideas  .         .       26 

CHAPTER   IV 

The  Dome  of  St.  Peter's 

Bramante  in  Rome  —  His  early  training  —  Character  of  the  Tempietto  of  San 
Pietro  in  Montorio  —  Its  likeness  to  a  Roman  temple  of  Vesta  —  Bramante's 
project  for  St.  Peter's  —  Uncertainty  as  to  his  scheme  for  the  whole  build- 
ing—  His  design  for  the  great  dome  —  Sources  of  his  inspiration  —  Com- 
parison of  his  dome  with  that  of  the  Pantheon  —  Structural  merits  and 
defects — The  architect's  probable  intention  to  use  a  great  order  for  the 
interior  of  the  church  —  Michael  Angelo's  appointment  as  architect  —  His 
scheme  for  the  great  dome  —  Its  statical  defects  —  Its  supposed  Gothic 
character  —  Comparison  with  the  dome  of  Salamanca  —  Its  illogical  buttress 
system  —  Its  ruptures  and  the  alarm  which  they  occasioned  —  Commission 
appointed  to  examine  the  fabric  and  report  on  its  condition  —  Poleni's 
opinion  and  his  binding  chains  —  The  grandiose  character  of  the  dome^— 
In  following  Brunelleschi,  Michael  Angelo  went  farther  in  a  wrong  direc- 
tion —  Such  a  scheme  cannot  be  safely  carried  out  without  resort  to  ex- 
traneous means  of  support  —  The  proper  mode  of  constructing  a  dome 
settled  by  the  ancient  Roman  and  the  Byzantine  builders — Condition  of 
the  dome  ignored  by  recent  writers  —  The  ruptures  attributed  by  the  early 
Italian  writers  to  carelessness  on  the  part  of  Bramante  —  The  beauty  of 
the  dome  exaggerated  —  Its  violation  of  structural  propriety  incompatible 
with  the  highest  architectural  beauty 44 

CHAPTER  V 

Church  Architecture  of  the  Roman  Renaissance 

Other  parts  of  the  church  of  St.  Peter  —  Beauty  of  its  plan  —  This  plan  could 
not  be  carried  out  with  a  good  result  in  classic  Roman  details  —  Awkward 
makeshifts  to  which  Michael  Angelo  was  led  —  The  colossal  order  of  the 


CONTENTS  xi 


interior  —  The  magnitude  of  the  structural  parts  of  the  church  unavoidable 

—  The  real  character  of  the  building  contradicted  by  the  external  order  — 
Makeshifts  which  this  order  necessitated  —  The  real  character  of  St.  Peter's 
has  been  rarely  analyzed  —  Its  grandeur  due  to  its  magnitude  and  to  what 
it  derives  from  the  design  of  Bramante  —  Its  incongruity  and  extravagance 

—  Use  of  stucco  in  the  ornamentation  of  the  interior  —  Extravagant  lauda- 
tion of  the  building  by  the  earlier  Italian  writers  —  Antonio  San  Gallo's 
project  for  St.  Peter's — Earlier  examples  of  Roman  Renaissance  church 
architecture  —  Sant'  Agostino  a  mediaeval  building  with  Renaissance  de- 
tails—  Its  facade — Santa  Maria  della  Consolazione  at  Todi  —  Its  attribu- 
tion to  Bramante  —  Irrational  treatment  of  its  interior  —  Merit  of  the 
exterior  in  its  larger  features  —  San  Biagio  at  Montepulciano — The  order 
of  the  interior  —  The  Renaissance  use  of  a  pilaster  coupled  with  a  column 
on  the  corner  of  a  building —  Roman  treatment  of  the  corner  —  Instance 
of  the  use  of  a  corner  pilaster  described  by  Serlio  —  The  exterior  of  San 
Biagio  —  Its  campanile  and  lantern  —  The  evolution  of  this  form  of  tower 

—  System  of  Santissima  Annunziatta  at  Arezzo  —  Vignola,  and  Milizia's 
remarks  on  him  —  His  book  of  architecture  —  His  advocacy  of  ancient 
Roman  art  and  his  disregard  in  practice  of  its  principles  —  His  design 
for  Sant'  Andrea  di  Ponte  Molle  —  Its  derivation  from  the  Pantheon  — 
Vignola's  design  for  the  church  of  Santa  Maria  degli  Angeli  at  Assisi  —  His 
design  for  the  Gesii  at  Rome  —  Aberrations  of  design  in  this  work  —  The 
fa9ade  by  Della  Porta — Palladio,  and  his  great  influence  on  modern  art 

—  His  book  of  architecture  —  His  design  for  the  church  of  San  Giorgio 
Maggiore  at  Venice  —  The  Redentore  and  San  Francesco  della  Vigna       .      66 

CHAPTER  VI 

Palace  Architecture  of  the  Florentine  Renaissance 

The  neo-classic  ideas  most  extensively  carried  out  in  palatial  houses  —  Domestic 
architecture  of  the  Middle  Ages  in  Italy  —  The  Palazzo  Riccardi  —  Its 
mediaeval  features  —  Its  general  form  —  Its  court  arcades  —  General  char- 
acter of  the  interior — "^'^asari's  remarks  on  the  Riccardi  —  The  Palazzo 
Pitti  —  The  Strozzino — The  Strozzi  —  The  Pazzi  —  The  Quaratesi  —  The 
Guardagni  and  its  reasonable  character  —  The  Rucellai  —  Introduction  of 
orders  in  the  facade  of  the  Rucellai  —  The  architect  Alberti  —  His  archaeo- 
logical and  literary  tastes  —  Alberti's  initiative  in  the  use  of  the  orders 
not  immediately  followed  —  Further  neo-classic  innovations  introduced  by 
Baccio  d' Agnolo  —  Milizia's  remarks  on  these  innovations  —  Increase  in 
the  spirit  of  display  in  domestic  architecture  —  Decline  of  Florentine 
ascendency  by  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century  —  Artistic  activities 
transferred  to  Rome — Erection  of  sumptuous  palatial  houses  in  Rome      .     102 

CHAPTER   Vn 

Palace  Architecture  of  the  Roman  Renaissance 

The  Cancellaria  —  Its  attribution  to  Bramante  —  Exhibits  features  in  further 
conformity  with  the  Roman  antique  —  Its  pilasters  in  pairs  —  Its  projecting 
bavs  —  Its  portals  —  Arcades  of  its  court  —  The  Palazzo  Massimi  —  The 


xii  CONTENTS 


functional  order  of  its  portico  —  Treatment  of  the  upper  fagade  —  The 
Palazzo  Farnese — Application  of  orders  and  pediments  to  the  windows  — 

—  The  broken  entablatures  of  these  windows — An  ancient  example  of 
similar  treatment  —  Orders  of  the  court  — Awkward  result  in  the  angles  — 
Rhythmical  scheme  of  the  cloister  of  Santa  Maria  della  Pace  —  Lack  of 
reason  for  this  scheme  —  The  architect  Sansovino  —  His  design  for  the 
Library  of  St.  Mark  at  Venice  —  Treatment  of  the  angles  of  the  Doric 
order — Free-standing  column  in  the  order  of  the  upper  story — Sanso- 
vino's  design  for  the  Loggetta  of  the  Campanile  —  His  design  for  the 
Palazzo  Cornaro  —  Sanmichele  —  His  design  for  the  Porta  del  Palio  at 
Verona  —  His  design  for  the  Palazzo  Canossa  —  The  Palazzo  Pompei  alia 
Vittoria  —  The  Palazzo  Bevilacqua — Its  singular  aberrations  of  design  — 
Vignola's  design  for  the  Palazzo  Caprarola  —  Influence  of  its  circular  court 
on  De  I'Ornie  and  Inigo  Jones — The  civic  and  domestic  architecture  of 
Palladio  —  The  Portico  of  Vicenza  —  Its  derivation  from  the  town  hall  of 
Padua  and  from  the  Library  of  St.  Mark  —  Syrian  instance  of  the  free- 
standing column  in  connection  with  the  arch  —  Palladio's  own  estimate  of 
the  merits  of  this  design  —  Use  of  poor  materials  by  Palladio  —  His  versa- 
tility in  meaningless  composition — His  palace  fronts  —  Palladio  a  gram- 
matical formalist — The  art  of  Scamozzi —  His  use  of  an  entablature  broken 

by  an  arch 112 

CHAPTER  VIII 

Church  Architecture  of  the  Renaissance  in  North  Italy 

Various  other  phases  of  the  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  —  The  fa9ade  of 
San  Bernardino  of  Perugia  —  The  facade  of  the  Certosa  of  Pavia  —  Its 
combination  of  local  mediaeval  and  distorted  neo-classic  features  —  The 
church  and  sacristy  of  San  Satiro —  Evidence  that  both  were  designed  by 
Bramante  —  Santa  Maria  delle  Grazie  —  Its  dome  —  Architectural  treat- 
ment of  its  exterior  —  Its  attribution  to  Bramante  — The  chapel  of  St.  Peter 
Martyr  attributed  to  Michelozzi  —  The  Monastero  Maggiore — The  cathe- 
dral of  Como  —  Evidence  of  Bramante's  hand  in  the  east  end  —  Its  details 
of  mediaeval  Lombard  character  mixed  with  neo-classic  elements  —  The 
south  portal  —  The  windows  of  the  nave  —  Architecture  of  the  Venetian 
Renaissance  —  The  church  of  San  Zaccaria  —  Peculiar  column  of  its 
interior  —  The  church  of  San  Salvatore  —  Its  piers  —  Attic  of  the  interior 

—  The  church  of  Santa  Maria  dei  Miracoli — Architectural  treatment  of 
its  exterior  —  Excellence  of  its  mechanical  execution  —  The  fa9ade  of  Santa 
Maria  P'ormosa I35 

CHAPTER   IX 

Palace  Architecture  of  the  Renaissance  in  North  Italy 

Marked  local  character  of  the  palace  architecture  of  Venice  —  Fa9ade  of  east 
side  of  court  of  the  Ducal  Palace  —  Irregularities  of  its  composition  — 
North  side  of  the  same  court  —  The  Giant's  stair  —  Fa9ade  of  the  Scuola 
di  San  Marco  —  Composition  of  the  main  portal  —  Notable  refinements  of 


CONTENTS  xiii 

PAGE 

execution  in  this  portal  —  Fa9ade  of  the  Scuola  di  San  Rocco  —  Unique 
architectural  character  of  the  palaces  of  the  Grand  Canal  —  Those  of  the 
mediaeval  period  alone  have  the  distinctive  Venetian  character — Neo-classic 
details  used  sparingly  in  the  early  Renaissance  palaces  of  Venice  —  The 
Palazzo  Corner- Spinelli  —  Disposition  and  character  of  its  windows  — 
Questionable  propriety  of  the  panelling  of  its  pilasters  —  The  beauty  of 
the  fagade  independent  of  its  neo-classic  details  —  The  Palazzo  Contarini 
—  The  varied  proportions  of  its  pilasters  —  The  Palazzo  Vendramini  — 
The  distinctive  Venetian  character  altered  by  the  application  of  complete 
orders  —  This  character  largely  lost  in  the  palaces  of  the  Roman  Renais- 
sance —  The  Palazzo  del  Consiglio  of  Verona  —  Its  mediaeval  scheme  — 
The  Palazzo  Comunale  of  Brescia  —  The  Ospedale  Maggiore  of  Milan  — 
Its  lack  of  distinctive  character  —  The  later  palace  architecture  of  north 
Italy IS4 

CHAPTER  X 

Architectural  Carving  of  the  Renaissance 

Little  architectural  character  in  the  sculpture  of  the  Renaissance  —  Close  imi- 
tation of  Roman  models  —  Great  delicacy  of  design  and  execution  in  much 
carving  of  the  Renaissance  —  Lack  of  vital  beauty  in  this  carving  —  Com- 
parison with  Greek  conventional  ornamentation  —  Exceptional  beauty  of 
foliation  in  the  reliefs  of  the  Lombardi  —  Lifeless  character  of  the  scroll 
leafage  of  Filarete  —  Artificial  convolutions  of  Renaissance  ornamental 
designs  —  Artificial  and  inorganic  composition  in  the  works  of  Benedetto 
da  Maiano  —  Representation  of  artificial  objects  in  Renaissance  ornamenta- 
tion —  Disordered  composition  in  the  borders  of  the  Ghiberti  gates  — 
Comparison  of  Greek  leafage  with  that  of  the  Renaissance  —  The  grotesque 
in  Renaissance  ornamentation 167 

CHAPTER    XI 

Architecture  of  the  Early  Renaissance  in  France 

The  Renaissance  had  not  the  same  meaning  north  of  the  Alps  that  it  had  in 
Italy  —  A  fundamental  change  in  French  architecture  effected  by  the 
Renaissance  influence  —  Survival  of  the  Gothic  style  —  Conditions  which 
favoured  the  change  from  Mediaeval  to  Renaissance  forms  —  The  transfor- 
mation of  the  feudal  castle  into  the  Renaissance  ch&teau  —  Factitious 
character  of  the  French  Renaissance  chateau  —  Peculiar  mixture  of 
pseudo-Gothic  and  neo-classic  details  in  early  French  Renaissance  archi- 
tecture—  The  chateau  of  Azay  le  Rideau  —  Survival  in  this  building  of 
the  larger  mediaeval  forms  —  Its  ornamental  portal  based  on  that  of  Chi- 
teaudun  —  Analysis  of  this  portal  —  A  different  manifestation  of  Flamboyant 
ideas  in  the  portal  of  Chenonceaux — The  chdteau  of  La  Rochefoucauld  — 
The  eastern  wing  of  Blois — The  staircase  tower  of  the  court — The  garden 
side  of  the  eastern  wing  —  The  chateau  of  Chambord  —  Its  florid  upper 
part  —  Fontainebleau  —  Ecouen  —  Bullant's  portico  —  Exceptional  char- 


xiv  CONTENTS 


PAGR 


acter  of  the  chateau  of  St.  Germain  en  Laye  —  Further  transformation  of 
French  architecture  in  the  later  sixteenth  century 1 79 

CHAPTER  XII 

Lescot  and  De  l'Orme 

French  architecture  further  changed  by  Lescot  and  De  I'Orme,  yet  still  without 
elimination  of  native  characteristics  —  Lescot's  design  for  the  Fountain  of 
the  Nymphs  —  The  sculptures  by  Goujon  —  Possible  derivation  of  the 
design  from  a  drawing  by  Serlio  —  Lescot's  design  for  the  Louvre  —  Capri- 
cious treatment  of  neo-classic  details  in  this  design  —  The  traditional  logic 
of  French  design  ignored  by  Lescot  —  Excessive  ornamentation  of  the 
Louvre  —  The  architectural  work  of  De  I'Orme  —  Paucity  of  extant  exam- 
ples—  His  design  for  the  palace  of  the  Tuileries  —  De  I'Orme's  column  — 
His  claim  that  this  column  was  his  own  invention — Earlier  instances  of 
the  same  —  A  conscious  effort  to  be  original  gave  rise  to  most  of  the 
artistic  aberrations  of  the  Renaissance  —  Noble  architecture  not  a  personal, 
but  a  communal  and  national,  product  —  Analysis  of  the  fa9ade  of  the 
Tuileries  —  De  I'Orme's  other  architectural  aberrations — The  chateau  of 
Charleval  —  The  freakish  character  of  this  design  —  Discussion  of  Viollet 
le  Due's  comments  on  it  —  The  church  architecture  of  the  French  Renais- 
sance —  The  church  of  St.  Eustache  —  Its  unmodified  Gothic  structural 
system  —  Its  neo-classic  details  —  St.  Etienne  du  Mont  —  SS.  Gervais  and 
Protais  at  Gisors  —  The  apse  of  St.  Pierre  of  Caen  —  The  Portal  of  St. 
Maclou  at  Pontoise 194 

CHAPTER   XIII 

Architecture  of  the  Renaissance  in  England 

I.   Elizabethan  Art 

Derivation  of  the  Elizabethan  domestic  architecture  from  the  native  mediaeval 
art  —  The  reasonable  character  of  the  early  Elizabethan  house  in  its  in- 
tegrity —  The  ostentatious  character  and  pseudo-classicism  of  the  great 
English  houses  of  the  sixteenth  century  —  Use  of  flimsy  materials  in  orna- 
mental details  —  General  excellence  of  construction  in  the  main  body  of 
the  building  —  Employment  of  foreign  craftsmen  in  ornamentation — Kirby 
Hall  —  Its  lack  of  native  English  character  —  Peculiar  aberrations  in  the 
use  of  structural  forms  without  structural  functions  —  Fantastic  ornamenta- 
tion of  the  gables  —  Longford  Castle  —  Its  resemblance  to  Chambord  — 
Manifold  forms  of  capricious  design  in  Lower  Walterstone  Hall,  Cranborne 
Manor-House,  Tixall,  Stanway,  and  other  buildings  —  Fantastic  composi- 
tion of  the  gate  at  Caius  College,  Cambridge  —  Aberrations  of  design  in 
Wollaton  Hall  —  Ungrammatical  and  tasteless  misuse  of  distorted  classic 
elements  in  Elizabethan  architecture  largely  due  to  Flemish  and  Dutch 
workmen  —  No  professional  architects  in  Elizabethan  times  —  The  classic 
orders  foreign  to  the  genius  and  the  needs  of  the  English  people        .         .     216 


CONTENTS  XV 

CHAPTER  XIV 
Architecture  of  the  Renaissance  in  England 

II.    Jones  and  Wren 

'  PAGE 

The  architecture  of  England  in  the  seventeenth  century  properly  called  Re- 
naissance only  by  extension  of  the  term  —  Jones  and  Wren  the  only  archi- 
tects of  importance  at  this  time  —  Walpole's  extravagant  estimate  of  Inigo 
Jones  —  The  early  career  of  Jones — His  design  for  the  Banqueting  Hall 
of  the  palace  of  Whitehall  —  Its  lack  of  English  character  —  Analysis  of 
the  design  —  Kent's  exaggerated  estimate  of  Jones's  genius  —  The  scheme 
for  the  whole  palace  —  Jones's  design  for  the  fagade  of  old  St.  Paul's  — 
Thoughtless  laudation  of  the  art  of  Inigo  Jones  —  Sir  Christopher  Wren 

—  Artistic  notions  of  the  English  dilettanti  in  the  seventeenth  century  — 
Wren's  architectural  training  —  His  visit  to  France  —  The  Sheldonian 
Theatre  —  Wren's  project  for  repairs  of  old  St.  Paul's — His  commission 
to  rebuild  —  His  first  scheme  for  the  new  edifice  —  Sources  of  inspiration 
for  the  great  dome —  Rejection  of  the  first  scheme  —  The  so-called  warrant 
design  —  The  existing  edifice  —  The  structural  system  of  the  dome  —  Char- 
acter of  the  interior  of  the  church — The  masking  of  the  buttress  system 

—  Wren's  city  churches 226 

CHAPTER  XV 

Conclusion 

The  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  not  based  on  consistent  principles  —  In- 
correctness of  the  notion  that  the  Renaissance  aberrations  in  the  use  of 
the  orders  was  but  a  free  adaptation  of  the  old  elements  to  new  conditions 

—  The  ancient  architectural  forms  do  not  lend  themselves  to  new  conditions 

—  Adaptation  involves  creative  changes  which  wholly  transform  original 
elements  —  Influence  of  the  writings  of  Vignola  and  Palladio  in  recent 
times — Modern  recognition  of  the  arbitrary  character  of  the  rules  of  the 
formalists — Genuine  works  of  art  not  produced  from  rules — A  juster 
sense  of  the  real  character  of  the  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  shown 

by  a  few  recent  writers 247 


ILLUSTRATIONS   IN   THE   TEXT 


PAGE 


1.  Hagia  Theotokos.     From  Dehio  and  Bezold ii 

2.  Aachen.     From  Dehio  and  Bezold li 

3.  Dome  of  Pisa 12 

4.  Dome  of  Arnolfo 13 

5.  Section  of  the  Baptistery  of  Florence 14 

6.  Dissection  of  the  vault  of  the  Baptistery 15 

7.  System  of  the  dome  of  Florence          .         , 17 

8.  Section  of  the  dome  of  Florence.     From  Sgrilli 18 

9.  Part  plan  of  the  dome  of  Florence.     From  Sgrilli 18 

10.  Plan  of  the  chapel  of  the  Pazzi 26 

11.  Section  of  the  vault  of  the  Pazzi  chapel 27 

12.  Interior  of  the  Pazzi  chapel 28 

13.  Facade  of  the  Pazzi  chapel          .........  30 

14.  Badia  of  Fiesole 32 

15.  Impost  of  San  Lorenzo 33 

16.  Crossing  pier  of  San  Lorenzo 34 

17.  Fa9ade  of  Santa  Maria  Novella 36 

18.  Plan  of  Sant'  Andrea,  Mantua 39 

19.  Facade  of  Sant'  Andrea,  Mantua 40 

20.  Arch  of  Septimius  Severus           . 41 

21.  Temple  of  Vesta,  Tivoli.     From  Serlio 45 

22.  San  Pietro  in  Montorio.     From  Serlio 46 

23.  Bramante's  dome  for  St.  Peter's.     From  Serlio 48 

24.  Section  of  the  Pantheon.     From  Fontana  .......  50 

25.  Plan  of  Bramante's  dome.     From  Serlio 51 

26.  Michael  Angelo's  model  for  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's 54 

27.  Diagrams  of  vault  construction •  5^ 

28.  Interior  of  dome  of  Salamanca -57 

29.  Diagrams  of  vault  construction 58 

30.  Dome  of  St.  Peter's.     From  the  Report  of , the  Mathematicians  ...  61 

31.  Plan  of  St.  Peter's.     From  Fontana 67 

32.  Section  of  aisle  of  St.  Peter's.     From  Fontana  and  Letarouilly  ...  69 

33.  Pier  of  Sant'  Agostino 72 

34.  Fa9ade  of  Sant'  Agostino 73 

35.  Exterior  of  Todi 75 

36.  Interior  of  Todi 76 

37.  Plan  of  San  Biagio 77 

38.  Interior  of  San  liiagio 78 

39.  Arcade.     From  Serlio 79 

40.  Exterior  of  San  Biagio 80 

41.  Tower  of  Santo  Spirito 82 

xvii 


xviii  LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS  IN  THE  TEXT 

FIG.  PAGB 

42.  Santissima  Annunziatta,  Arezzo 83 

43-   Vignola's  entablature.     From  Vignola 85 

44.  Half  plan  of  Sant'  Andrea.     From  Vignola 86 

45.  Section  of  Sant'  Andrea.     P"rom  Vignola 87 

46.  Sant'  Andrea 88 

47.  Order  of  Santa  Maria  degli  Angeli      ........  90 

48.  Plan  of  the  Gesu.     From  Vignola 91 

49.  Fa5ade  of  the  Gesu.     From  Vignola 93 

50.  Facade  of  the  Gesii,  Delia  Porta.     From  \ignola 94 

51.  Pediment  of  Baalbek 95 

52.  Tablet  from  Vignola 9^ 

53.  Orders  of  San  Giorgio 98 

54.  Fa9ade  of  San  Giorgio 99 

55.  The  Redentore 100 

56.  Window-head  of  the  Mozzi,  Florence 103 

57.  \Vindow-head  of  Perugia 103 

58.  Court  of  the  Riccardi 105 

59.  Fagade  of  the  Rucellai 108 

60.  Window  of  the  Bartolini no 

61.  Facade  of  the  Cancelleria 113 

62.  Portico  of  the  Massini 115 

63.  Window  of  the  Farnese 117 

64.  Portal.     From  Serlio 118 

65.  Part  of  facade  of  the  Library  of  St.  Mark 120 

66.  Corner  of  the  Parthenon 121 

67.  Roman  corner.     From  Serlio 122 

68.  Corner  of  Library  of  St.  Mark 1 23 

69.  Window  of  Palazzo  Cornaro 1 24 

70.  Part  of  fagade  of  the  Porta  del  Palio 125 

71.  Detail  of  Palazzo  Bevilacqua       . 127 

72.  Part  of  the  Portico  of  Vicenza.     From  Palladio 129 

73.  Plan  of  supports,  Portico  of  Vicenza.     From  Palladio         .         .         .         .130 

74.  Arch  of  St.  Simeon  Stylites 131 

75.  Loggia  Bernarda,  Vicenza 132 

76.  Window  of  Palazzo  Branzo 133 

77.  Niche  of  the  Basilica  of  Shakka 134 

78.  Window  of  the  Certosa  of  Pavia 137 

79.  Sacristy  of  San  Satiro          . 139 

80.  Santa  Maria  delle  Grazie .141 

81.  East  end  of  Como 143 

82.  Portal  of  Como 145 

83.  Porch  of  San  Zeno 146 

84.  Portal  of  San  Pietro  in  Cielo  d' Oro 147 

85.  Window  of  nave  of  Como .         .         .         .148 

86.  Column  of  San  Zaccaria      .         .         . 150 

87.  Plan  of  pier  of  San  Salvatore 151 

88.  Plan  of  pier  of  St.  Mark's 151 

89.  Facade  of  Santa  Maria  dei  Miracoli 152 

90.  Part  of  window  of  court  of  the  Du^al  Palace •  '55 


LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS  IN  THE  TEXT 


XIX 


FIG. 
91. 
92. 

93' 
94. 

95- 
96. 

97- 

98. 

99. 

100. 

lOI. 

102. 
103. 
104. 
105. 
106. 
107. 
108. 
109. 
no. 
III. 

112. 

113- 
114. 

"5- 

116. 
117. 
118. 
119. 

120. 

121. 

122. 
123. 
124. 

125. 
126. 
127. 
128. 
129. 
130. 

»3i- 
132. 
133- 
134. 
135- 
136. 

J37- 
138. 
139- 


Portal  of  the  Scuola  di  San  Marco     . 

Part  of  the  fagade  of  the  Scuola  di  San  Rocco 

Window  of  the  Palazzo  Contarini 

One  bay  of  basement  of  the  Ospedale  Maggiore 

Window  of  the  Palazzo  Martinengo 

Roman  Arabesque  relief    . 

Renaissance  Arabesque  relief    . 

Greek  coin,  magnified        .         . 

Arabesque  by  P'ilarete 

Console  of  pulpit  in  Santa  Croce 

Leafage  from  the  Ghiberti  gates 

Pilaster  in  the  National  Museum,  Florence 

Greek  leafage    .... 

Roman  leafage  .... 

Leafage  of  Brunelleschi     . 

Leafage  of  Brescia    . 

Leafage  of  San  Gallo 

Relief  of  the  Scala  d'  Oro 

Grotesque  mask 

Cornice  of  Blois 

Azay  le  Rideau  .... 

Portal  of  Azay  le  Rideau  . 

Portal  of  Chiteaudun 

Part  of  the  portal  of  Chenonceaux 

Part  of  the  court  facade  of  Blois 

Du  Cerceau's  print  of  the  Fountain  of  the  Nymphs 

Roman  arch.     From  Serlio 

Part  of  Du  Cerceau's  print  of  Lescot's  Louvre 

Plan  of  the  Tuileries.     From  Du  Cerceau 

Elevation  of  the  Tuileries.     From  Du  Cerceau 

De  I'Orme's  column.     From  De  I'Orme     . 

De  I'Orme's  doorway.     From  De  I'Orme  . 

Doorway.     From  Serlio     .... 

Doorway  of  De  I'Orme.     From  De  I'Orme 

Facade  of  Charleval.     From  Du  Cerceau  . 

Interi(jr  fagade  of  Charleval.     From  Du  Cerceau 

Chimney  of  Burghley  House 

North  side  of  court,  Kirby  Hall.     From  Gotch 

Gable  of  Kirby  Hall.     From  Gotch  . 

Window  of  Walterstone  Hall.     From  Gotch 

Impost  of  Cranborne  Manor-Iiouse.     From  Gotch 

Portal  of  Wollatcm  Hall.     From  Gotch 

Basement  of  Whitehall.     From  Kent 

Front  of  old  St.  Paul's.     P'rom  Kent 

Section  of  Wren's  rejected  scheme  for  St.  Paul's.     From  Bloomfield 

Section  of  the  dome  of  St.  Paul's.     From  Longman 

Vaulting  of  St.  Paul's 

Crossing  pier  and  impost  of  St.  Paul's 

Half  section  of  the  nave  of  St.  Paul's.     From  Longman 


LIST   OF   PLATES 

PAGE 

I.    The  Dome  of  Florence i6 

II.     Interior  of  Sant'  Andrea,  Mantua 38 

III.  The  Dome  of  St.  Peter's ,         .       63 

IV.  The  Riccardi  Palace        ..........     103 

V.     San  Bernardino,  Perugia .         •     I35 

VI.     Ducal  Palace,  Venice      .         . 154 

VII.  Palazzo  Corner-Spinelli,  Venice      .         .         .         .         .         .        ,         .160 

VIII.     Palazzo  del  Consiglio,  Verona .         .163 

IX.     Relief  of  the  Lombardi 169 

X.     The  Banqueting  Hall,  Whitehall 228 

XI.     The  Dome  of  St.  Paul's 239 

XII.     Interior  of  St.  Paul's 242 


CHAPTER   I 

INTRODUCTION 

The  great  change  in  ideas  and  ideals  which,  after  the 
remarkable  intellectual  and  artistic  life  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
was  manifested  in  the  so-called  Renaissance,  is  not  always  cor- 
rectly conceived  or  fairly  stated ;  and  the  character  and  merits 
of  the  Fine  Arts  of  the  Renaissance,  as  compared  with  those  of 
mediaeval  times,  have  not,  I  think,  been  often  set  forth  in  an 
entirely  true  light.  Of  the  merits  of  the  best  Italian  art  of  the 
fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  there  can  be  no  question,  but 
the  belief  that  this  art  is  altogether  superior  to  that  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages  will  not  bear  examination  in  the  light  of  impartial 
comparison. 

The  Fine  Arts  are  always  an  expression  of  the  historical 
antecedents,  the  intellectual,  moral,  and  material  conditions,  and 
the  religious  beliefs  of  the  peoples  and  epochs  to  which  they 
belong.  They  derive  their  whole  character  from  these  ante- 
cedents and  conditions,  and  cannot  be  rightly  understood  or 
appreciated  without  reference  to  them.  Thus  a  brief  considera- 
tion of  these  conditions  in  the  Middle  Ages  on  the  one  hand, 
and  in  the  period  of  the  Renaissance  on  the  other,  may  help  us 
to  understand  the  nature  of  the  above-mentioned  change,  and  to 
gain  a  more  discriminating  appreciation  of  the  real  character  of 
the  artistic  productions  of  the  latter  epoch. 

During  the  Middle  Ages  ideas  and  imagination  were  gov- 
erned by  a  reHgious  faith  which,  though  in  many  ways  mistaken 
and  misguided,  was  for  the  most  part  firm  and  unquestioning. 
Mediaeval  Christianity  was  a  living  power  with  the  masses,  and 
an  inspiration  to  men  of  genius.  The  mediaeval  Christian  mythol- 
ogy was  well  fitted  to  stimulate  artistic  invention,  and  the  ideals 
which  it  maintained  were  full  of  beauty.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that 
human  conduct  was  not  wholly  governed  by  this  faith ;  but  the 
precepts  of  the  Christian  religion,  as  defined  and  interpreted  by 


2  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

the  Roman  church,  were  generally  held  as  of  supreme  authority, 
and  to  them  most  people  acknowledged  that  they  ought  to  con- 
form. This  Christianity  gave  the  chief  motive  power  for  the 
best  activities  of  the  time,  and  the  social  relations  of  men  were, 
in  theory  at  least,  based  upon  its  teachings.  The  history  of  the 
Middle  Ages  abounds  in  evidence  that  popular  habits  of  life 
were  in  many  ways  exemplary.  Villani  tells  us  that  the  citizens 
of  Florence  lived  in  sobriety  and  frugality,  that  they  had  loyal 
hearts,  were  faithful  to  one  another,  and  that  they  required  the 
same  fidelity  in  the  administration  of  public  affairs.^  Florence 
in  the  fourteenth  century  was  alive  with  industry,  and  the  open 
country  around  the  city  was  prosperous  with  agriculture.  Of 
such  conditions  her  Fine  Arts  were  an  outgrowth  and  expression. 

But  the  mediaeval  faith  began  at  length  to  weaken.  The 
church,  as  an  ecclesiastical  establishment,  had  grown  corrupt 
and  oppressive,  so  that  men  of  spirit  were  moved  to  reject  its 
dogmas  and  to  resist  its  intellectual  tyranny.  Independent 
thought  began  to  widen  the  range  of  ideas,  and  the  reading  of 
ancient  authors  gave  a  fresh  incentive  to  philosophical  specula- 
tion, and  awakened  a  spirit  of  scientific  investigation,  as  well  as 
a  taste  for  ancient  poetry  and  mythology.  The  desire  for  intel- 
lectual freedom,  and  the  thirst  for  new  knowledge,  which  were 
thus  stimulated  in  the  fifteenth  century  constitute  the  good  side 
of  the  Renaissance  movement,  the  side  which  has  hitherto  been 
most  emphasized  by  writers,  and  to  which  the  modern  world  is 
indebted  for  a  strong  stimulus  in  the  direction  of  some  of  its 
most  fruitful  activities. 

But  there  were  other  conditions  that  must  not  be  ignored  if 
we  would  rightly  understand  the  spirit  of  the  Renaissance,  by 
which  the  ideals  and  aims  of  this  brilliant  epoch  were  materially 
qualified  and  weakened.  Influences  were  at  the  same  time  at  work 
that  were  not  in  harmony  with  what  was  best.  The  humanist 
learning  bred  a  Neo-pagan  spirit  which  favoured  and  strengthened 
a  growing  indifference  to  moral  principles  and  religious  beliefs. 
The  strong  feeling  of  opposition  to  the  church  was  in  part  due 
to  this.  In  fact,  the  Renaissance  was  by  no  means  an  entirely 
noble  movement  in  the  interest  of  spiritual  and  intellectual 
emancipation,  or  an  unqualified  advance  in  ideas  and  attainments 
beyond  those  of  the  Middle  Ages.     With  all  of  its  abuses  the 

1  Crcnica  di  Giovanni  Villani,  bk.  6,  chap.  69. 


1  INTRODUCTION  3 

church  still  stood  for  moral  order  and  spiritual  aspirations.  The 
revolt  against  it  was  in  part  a  revolt  against  both  rehgion  and 
morals.  The  animating  spirit  of  the  movement  contained  much 
that  was  unchristian  and  destructive  of  high  ideals. 

It  is  true  that  noble,  and  even  pious,  feelings  survived  in  the 
minds  of  many  men,  especially  during  the  early  Renaissance 
time.  Generous  acts  were  still  common  among  the  merchant 
princes  of  Florence.  In  the  early  part  of  the  fifteenth  century 
the  lives  of  Florentine  patricians  continued  to  be  simple,  and 
many  of  them  recognized  the  responsibilities  which  their  wealth 
imposed.^  But  toward  the  close  of  that  century  a  different  spirit 
prevailed.  Luxury  and  extravagance  took  the  place  of  plainer 
living,  the  pursuit  of  pleasure  without  regard  to  justice  or 
morality  engrossed  the  minds  of  men,  and  vice  and  crime  flour- 
ished in  high  places  until  the  prophetic  denunciations  of  Savo- 
narola were  called  down  upon  the  wickedness  and  vanity  of  the 
upper  classes. 

Into  the  service  of  this  luxurious  and  immoral  life  the  Fine 
Arts  were  now  called,  and  of  the  motives  which  animate  such 
life  they  become  largely  an  expression.  The  mediaeval  en- 
deavour to  embody  the  beauty  of  Christian  ideals  in  works  of 
art  gave  place  to  the  desire  to  make  the  Fine  Arts  minister  to 
sensuous  pleasure  and  to  mundane  pride.  In  the  height  of  its 
splendour  the  vicious  life  of  Florence,  the  chief  centre  of  literary 
and  artistic  productions,  was  appalling.  Men  now  not  only 
sought  to  escape  from  all  forms  of  ecclesiastical  and  ascetic 
restraint ;  they  went  further,  and  freely  proclaimed  the  suffi- 
ciency of  intellectual,  aesthetic,  and  sensuous  enjoyments  to 
satisfy  the  whole  of  man's  nature.  They  mistook  the  illusive 
pleasures  of  self-indulgence  for  the  true  joys  of  life.  In  aban- 
doning himself  to  mundane  pursuits  and  gratifications,  the  man 
of  the  Renaissance  fancied  that  he  got  the  utmost  good  out  of 
this  life,  and  took  little  thought  of  any  other. 

In  a  corresponding  spirit  the  architect  now  set  himself  to  the 
task  of  producing  a  luxurious  and  specious  style  of  palatial  archi- 
tecture, drawing  his  inspiration  from  the  monuments  of  imperial 
Rome,  and  the  sculptor  and  the  painter  sought  to  portray  physi- 
cal beauty  as  the  primary  and  sufficient  end  of  their  art.     Their 

^  Cf.  Introduction  to  Villari's  Niccolo  Machiavelli  and  his  Times,  London, 
1878. 


4  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

conceptions  of  this  beauty  were  in  part  drawn  from  the  remains 
of  the  art  of  classic  antiquity  that  were  then  accessible.  But 
the  ancient  works  of  art  known  at  that  time  were  not  those  of 
the  best  periods  of  ancient  artistic  culture.  They  were,  for  the 
most  part,  works  of  the  decadent  Greek  schools  as  represented 
in  Roman  copies.  Many  of  these  have,  indeed,  a  great  deal  of 
sensuous  charm,  and  display  much  technical  refinement;  but 
they  are  wanting  in  the  nobler  qualities  that  characterize  the 
finest  arts  of  Greece.  From  the  Roman  copies  of  fauns, 
Apollos,  and  Venuses  that  had  been  preserved  in  Italy,  it  was 
impossible  that  high  inspiration  and  true  guidance  should  be 
drawn. 

The  Fine  Arts  of  the  Renaissance  are  in  part  a  reflection  of 
this  decadent  art  of  classic  antiquity,  and  in  part  an  expression 
of  something  quite  different  which  was  peculiar  to  the  Italian 
genius  at  this  time.  To  the  man  of  the  Renaissance  the  classic 
inspiration  was  necessarily  different  from  what  it  had  been  to 
the  man  of  antiquity.  To  the  ancient  Greek  and  Roman  the 
pagan  ideals  had  been  real,  and  their  inspiration  was  genuine ; 
but  to  the  Italian  of  the  fifteenth  century  these  ideals  could  not 
have  the  same  meaning,  or  supply  a  true  incentive.  After  the 
intervening  centuries  of  Christian  thought  and  experience  it  was 
impossible  for  men  to  approach  the  ancient  themes  in  the  spirit 
of  the  ancients.  Thus  the  Neo-pagan  Art  of  the  Renaissance 
is  not  wholly  spontaneous  and  sincere.  It  contains  elements 
that  are  foreign  to  the  pagan  spirit,  and  not  compatible  with  it. 
The  art  of  the  Renaissance  is,  in  fact,  an  embodiment  of  hetero- 
geneous ideas  and  conflicting  aims. 

Much  has  been  said  of  the  importance  of  the  Renaissance 
movement  in  developing  the  individual  man,  and  it  is  true  that 
one  of  the  most  marked  characteristics  of  the  artistic  produc- 
tions of  this  time,  as  contrasted  with  those  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
is  a  distinctly  individual,  or  personal,  stamp.  This  is  especially 
marked  in  architecture.  Whereas  before,  and  during,  the  Middle 
Ages  in  particular,  architecture  had  been  a  communal  art,  the 
joint  product  of  companies  of  men  working  together  on  tradi- 
tional lines,  with  common  aims  and  aspirations,  it  was  now 
become  very  largely  an  expression  of  the  personal  tastes  of 
individuals  working  independently  of  each  other.  The  archi- 
tects  of    the   Renaissance    were    scholars   and   artists,    newly 


I  INTRODUCTION'  5 

acquainted  with  the  Roman  antique,  animated  with  desire  to 
appropriate  what  they  apprehended  of  its  principles,  and  at  the 
same  time  ambitious  to  achieve  personal  fame.  A  building  of 
the  Renaissance  is  thus  always  the  product  of  the  fancy  of  a 
particular  designer,  as  a  building  of  the  Middle  Ages  is  not. 
But  architecture  of  the  highest  excellence  can  hardly  be  pro- 
duced by  an  individual  working  independently.  The  noblest 
architecture  of  the  past  has  always  been  an  evolution  of  a 
people,  the  joint  product  of  many  minds,  and  the  natural 
expression  of  many  conditions.  The  importance  of  the  oppor- 
tunity for  the  development  of  the  individual  opened  by  the 
Renaissance  has  been  exaggerated,  and  the  conditions  condu- 
cive to  such  development  which  had  existed  before  have  been 
too  much  overlooked.  We  are  apt  to  forget  that  the  mediaeval 
communal  life  stimulated  the  faculties  of  the  individual  in  many 
noble  ways,  and  we  do  not  always  enough  consider  that  indi- 
viduality may  be  exercised  in  harmful  as  well  as  in  salutary 
directions.  The  individuality  that  had  been  developed  by  the 
institutions  and  the  intellectual  life  of  the  Middle  Ages  was 
vastly  different  from  that  which  was  produced  by  the  influences 
of  the  Renaissance,  and  it  was  in  many  ways  more  excellent. 
The  individuality  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  obedient  to  the 
demands  of  corporate  and  cooperative  life,  while  that  of  the 
Renaissance  was  independent  and  capricious.  Conditions 
favourable  to  individual  development  had  arisen  early  in  the 
Middle  Ages  in  connection  with  organized  monastic  Hfe.  The 
cultivation  of  literature,  philosophy,  and  the  Fine  Arts  in  the 
monasteries  had  given  considerable  range  to  the  exercise  of 
individual  powers,^  though  in  limited  directions,  and  the  rise 
of  the  great  communal  organizations  tended  still  further  to 
stimulate  an  admirable  individual  development.  But  the  in- 
dividual of  the  Middle  Ages  felt  himself  a  part  of  an  organ- 
ized body  from  which'  he  derived  moral  support,  and  with 
which  he  felt  that  he  must  cooperate.  It  was  the  strong 
communal  spirit,  giving  unity  of  purpose  to  the  varied  faculties 
of  individuals,  that  made  possible  the  production  of  the  noble 
arts  of  the  Middle  Ages ;  and  it  is  as  the  expression  of  this 
unity  of  purpose  coordinating  the  fine  artistic  energies  of 
the  time,  that  these  arts  are  preeminently  notable.     In  so  far 

^  Cf.  Montalembert,  Les  Moines  d^  Occident,  vol.  2,  p.  488  etseq. 


6  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap 

as  the  development  of  the  individual  in  the  period  of  the  Re- 
naissance differed  from  that  of  the  Middle  Ages,  it  did  so  mainly 
in  favouring  individual  caprice  at  the  expense  of  harmonious 
collective  effort.  The  capricious  and  irresponsible  individuality 
of  the  time,  together  with  the  confused  complexity  of  ideas  and 
aims,  gave  rise  to  most  of  that  which  is  open  to  criticism  in  the 
Fine  Arts  of  the  Renaissance. 

Nearly  all  of  the  architects  of  this  epoch  were  sculptors  and 
painters.  Few  of  them  had  ever  had  a  thorough  training  in 
architectural  design  and  construction,  such  as  had  been  general 
with  the  members  of  the  great  mediaeval  building  corporations ; 
and  hardly  any  of  them  were  endowed  with  a  natural  aptitude 
for  logical  construction.  The  artistic  genius  of  the  Italian 
people  has,  in  fact,  always  been  essentially  a  genius  for  paint- 
ing, and  the  painter's  habits  of  mind  are  constantly  manifested 
in  the  Italian  architecture  of  all  epochs.  This  is  especially 
noticeable  in  their  use  of  the  Orders,  which  is  rarely  based  on 
any  structural  need,  but  is  governed  only  by  the  fancy  of  the 
designer  in  seeking  to  produce  a  pleasant  surface  composition. 
Columns  and  pilasters,  answering  to  nothing  in  the  real  struc- 
tural scheme  of  a  building,  are  disposed  with  no  thought  save 
for  agreeable  lines  and  rhythmical  spacings.  Thus  they  soon 
came  to  be  used  in  many  novel  ways.  They  were  set  in  pairs, 
stretched  through  several  stories,  embraced  by  pediments,  and 
varied  in  countless  fanciful  ways.  In  this  way  the  architecture 
of  the  Renaissance  even  more  than  that  of  imperial  Rome, 
became  a  mere  surface  architecture  differing  fundamentally 
from  all  of  the  great  architectural  systems  of  ancient  times, 
and  of  the  Middle  Ages.  This  is  a  consideration  of  capital 
importance  of  which  too  little  account  has  been  taken.  The 
unqualified  and  shortsighted  laudation  of  this  architecture 
by  the  sophisticated  writers  of  the  sixteenth  century  has 
been  too  readily  accepted,  and  a  more  discriminating  judg- 
ment cannot  fail  to  alter  materially  the  esteem  in  which  it  has 
been  held. 

In  surveying  the  history  of  architectural  design  with  atten- 
tion to  its  fundamental  principles  we  shall  find  that  there  have 
thus  far  existed  in  Europe  but  three  entirely  consistent  and  dis- 
tinctive styles ;  namely,  the  Greek,  the  Byzantine,  and  the  Gothic. 
All  other  varieties  of  architecture  may  be  broadly  divided  into 


r  INTRODUCTION  7 

two  classes,  the  one  consisting  of  buildings  of  transitional  char- 
acter, and  comprising  all  organic  and  progressive  types  of 
Romanesque,  and  the  other  composed  of  styles  made  up  of 
mixed  elements  not  in  process  of  organic  fusion.  The  first  archi- 
tecture of  the  second  class  is  that  of  imperial  Rome  with  its  off- 
shoots, the  Christian  Roman  and  the  numerous  subsequent  forms 
of  the  basilican  type,  and  the  second  is  the  architecture  of  the 
Renaissance.  When,  after  studying  the  architecture  of  Greece, 
we  come  to  examine  that  of  Rome,  we  are  at  once  struck  by  the 
incongruous  mixture  of  elements  which  it  exhibits  ;  and  although 
we  may  be  impressed  by  its  grandeur,  we  are  unable  to  give  it 
our  unqualified  admiration.  In  Byzantine  art  we  find  Greek, 
Roman,  and  Oriental  elements,  logically  modified  in  adaptation 
to  new  uses,  and  fused  into  a  radically  new  and  distinctive  style 
of  entire  consistency  and  great  nobility.  ^  In  the  transitional 
art  of  western  Europe  we  see  the  creative  genius  of  Northern 
races  gradually  evolving  the  Gothic  style,  in  which  elements 
derived  from  the  older  systems  are  wholly  recreated  and  assimi- 
lated in  a  wonderful  manner,  and  when  we  turn  from  the  beauty, 
and  the  structural  logic,  of  the  consummate  Gothic  Art^  to 
the  architecture  of  the  Renaissance,  a  similar  contrast  is  again 
apparent. 

In  one  branch  of  art,  however,  the  best  achievements  of  the 
Renaissance  period  command  our  unqualified  admiration;  namely, 
the  art  of  painting.  As  before  remarked,  the  Italian  genius 
appears  to  have  been  primarily  a  genius  for  painting,  and  in 
this  field  the  conditions  all  conspired  to  produce  results  that 
were  without  precedent  for  excellence,  and  that  still  remain 
unrivalled.  Yet  here,  too,  we  shall  need  to  discriminate.  Italian 
painting  of  the  sixteenth  century  presents  a  variety  of  phases 
that  are  by  no  means  of  equal  merit,  and  the  noblest  forms  of 
it  show  the  least  of  the  essentially  Renaissance  spirit.  The 
Christian  painters  of  the  fourteenth  century  had  laid  a  founda- 
tion on  which  their  successors  could  build,  and  this  gave  a 
character  to  much  of  the  art  of  the  Early  Renaissance  which 
the  dominant  influences  of  the  time  itself  could  not  give.^     But 

^  Cf.  my  Development  and  Character  of  Gothic  Architecture,  pp.  304—306. 
"^  The  Gothic  of  northern  France  of  the  twelfth  and  early  thirteenth  centuries, 
the  only  true  Gothic  art,  is  here  meant. 

^  The   Viscount  Delaborde,   in    his  book    La  Gravure  en  Italie  avant  Marc- 


8  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

the  spirit  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  unfavourable  to  the  high- 
est ideals  and  the  most  exemplary  practice,  and,  save  for  the 
works  of  a  few  exceptional  men,  there  were  no  high  achieve- 
ments in  painting  after  about  1520,  except  in  Venice,  where 
more  than  elsewhere  natural  and  wholesome  conditions  had  been 
maintained. 

Among  the  many  influences  that  were  stirring  the  artistic 
minds  of  the  Renaissance  there  were  two  of  chief  importance, 
the  Neo-pagan  revival,  and  the  true  intellectual  life  of  the 
people  which  was  independent  of  the  retrospective  movement, 
and  had  been  growing  up  through  the  Middle  Ages,  The 
most  sterling  qualities  of  the  artistic  products  of  the  period 
are  due  to  this  intellectual  life,  and  Florentine  and  Venetian 
painting,  the  two  most  admirable  phases  of  the  supreme  art  of 
Italy,  are  the  finest  expression  of  this.  In  other  words,  it  was 
not  the  revival  of  interest  in  ancient  thought  and  feeling,  nor 
the  influence  of  classic  models,  so  much  as  the  ripened  devel- 
opment of  the  native  Italian  genius  itself,  that  produced  what 
is  most  excellent  in  the  Fine  Arts  of  the  Renaissance.  A  con- 
sciously retrospective  motive  can  hardly  be  a  vital  force  in 
artistic  development,  and  the  direct  attempt,  in  so  far  as  such 
attempt  was  made,  to  shape  the  arts  after  classic  models  was 
an  unmixed  evil.  The  native  traditions  and  innate  tendencies 
of  the  Italian  people  were  enough  of  themselves  to  give  a  strong 
classic  quality  to  their  art.  In  architecture  what  of  classic  feel- 
ing was  natural  to  them  needed  only  in  the  fifteenth  century  to 
be  freed  from  the  elements  which  had  been  misappropriated 
from  the  mediaeval  art  of  the  North  to  allow  it  true  expression 
in  forms  adapted  to  their  needs.  In  normal  human  progress 
each  successive  stage  of  development  creates  its  own  appropri- 

Antoine,  Paris,  1883,  p.  32,  remarks  on  this  with  admirable  discrimination  as  follows  : 
"  Certes,  sous  le  pinceau  de  Botticelli,  de  pareils  sujets  [subjects  drawn  from  Classical 
Mythology]  gardent  un  caractere  d'elegance  tendre  et  de  melancolie  presque  analogue 
h.  la  physionomie  des  scenes  ou  figurent  I'Enfant-Dieu  et  la  Madone.  II  y  a  loin  de 
cette  maniere  d'interpreter  la  Fable  aux  panegyriques  violemment  ou  galamment 
licencieux  que  les  botes  les  plus  mal  fames  de  I'Olympe  obtiendront  dans  les  siecles 
suivants;  il  y  a  loin  des  gracieuses  inventions  de  Botticelli  aux  lascivie  brutales 
de  Jules  Romain  et  d'Augustin  Carrache  ou  aux  gamineries  mythologiques  de 
Boucher  et  de  ses  pareils,  et  I'on  a  quelque  peine  aujourd'hui,  en  face  d'aussi 
chastes  tableaux,  a  comprendre  la  vehemence  des  reproches  fulmines  jadis  par 
Savonarole." 


I  INTRODUCTION  9 

ate  forms ;  but  peoples,  like  individuals,  sometimes  pass  through 
periods  of  partial  aberration,  and  while  genius  may  still  find 
scope  enough,  as  in  the  Renaissance,  to  produce  much  that  is 
admirable,  the  noblest  forms  of  art  are  not  an  outgrowth  of 
such  conditions. 


CHAPTER   II 

THE    DOME    OF    FLORENCE 

The  great  dome  of  the  cathedral  of  Florence  marks  the 
beginning  of  the  Renaissance  movement  in  architecture,  though 
in  its  general  form  and  structural  character  it  has  no  likeness 
to  ancient  domes,  and  has  few  details  drawn  from  the  Roman 
classic  source.  It  exhibits  a  wide  departure  from  any  previous 
forms  of  dome  construction,  and  is  an  expression  of  the  creative 
genius  of  a  remarkably  gifted  man  of  great  independence,  work- 
ing under  inspiration  drawn  in  part  from  ancient  sources,  in 
part  from  mediaeval  building  traditions,  and  in  still  larger  part 
from  the  new  motives  that  were  beginning  to  animate  the  artistic 
ambitions  of  the  fifteenth  century. 

The  dome  of  the  Pantheon  and  the  dome  of  St.  Sophia,  the 
two  greatest  domes  of  former  times,  had  been  built  on  prin- 
ciples that  did  not  admit  of  much  external  effect,  and  the 
numerous  smaller  ones  of  the  Middle  Ages,  in  western  Europe, 
had  been  equally  inconspicuous  externally,  if  not  entirely  hidden 
from  view,  in  consequence  of  rising  from  within  a  drum  which 
reached  far  above  the  springing  level.  In  most  cases  the  whole 
construction  was  covered  with  a  timber  roof,  so  that  from  the 
outside  the  existence  of  a  dome  would  not  be  suspected.  This 
was  a  secure  mode  of  construction,  and  one  that  for  stability 
could  not  be  improved ;  but  it  did  not  give  the  imposing  external 
effect  that  Brunelleschi  sought. 

Attempts  to  make  the  dome  a  conspicuous  external  feature 
had  indeed  been  made  before  Brunelleschi's  time.  The  later 
Byzantine  builders  had  raised  small  domes  on  drums  resting  on 
pendentives,  and  rising  above  the  main  roof  of  the  building, 
but  they  had  still  carried  these  drums  up  somewhat  above  the 
springing  of  the  dome,  and  had  further  fortified  them  with  but- 
tresses built  over  the  supporting  piers,  as  in  Hagia  Theotokos 
of  Constantinople  (Fig.   i).     Thus  in  such  designs   the  dome 


CHAP.  II 


THE  DOME  OF  FLORENCE 


still  remains  partly  hidden  from  view,  the  drum  being  the  most 
conspicuous  part  of  the  composition.     Among  the  early  domes 


Fig.  I.  —  Hagia  Theotokos. 


of  western  Europe  is  that  of  Aachen  (Fig.  2).     In  this  case  the 
drum  is  carried  up  far  beyond  the  springing,  and  is  covered 


Fk;.  2.  —  Aachen. 


with  a  timber  roof  which  completely  hides  the  dome  from  ex- 
ternal view.  The  same  adjustment  of  the  dome  to  its  drum  is, 
with  minor  variations  of  form  (the  dome  being  in  some  cases 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


polygonal  on  plan,  as  at  Aachen,  and  in  some  cases  hemi- 
spherical) found  in  most  other  mediaeval  domes,  and  the  timber 
roof  over  all  is  likewise  common.  But  in  a  few  cases  a  differ- 
ent scheme  was  adopted  in  which  the  dome  is  set  on  the  top 
of  the  drum  instead  of  within  it.  In  such  cases,  however,  the 
drum  is  low,  not  rising  above  the  ridge  of  the  timber  roof  of 
the  nave,  and  the  dome,  being  unprovided  with  abutment,  is 


Fig.  3.  —  Dome  of  Pisa. 


insecure  except  in  so  far  as  it  may  have  a  form  that  is  self- 
sustaining  as  to  thrusts  (which  removes  it  from  the  true  dome 
shape),  or  may  be  secured  by  some  kind  of  binding  chain.^ 
An  example  of  such  a  dome  occurs  on  a  small  scale  over  the 
crossing  of  the  cathedral  of  Pisa  (Fig.  3).  This  dome  is  not 
hemispherical,  its  sides  rise  steeply,  and  with  such  moderate 
curvature   as    to   render    it    measurably    self-sustaining    as    to 

^  The  elevated  domes  of  Arabian  architecture  are  in  many  cases  constructed  of 
wood  and  stucco.  When  of  masonry  they  are,  I  believe,  either  weighted  within 
wheiC  the  thrusts  fall,  or  are  bound  with  chains. 


THE  DOME  OF  FLORENCE 


13 


thrust^  Another  instance  of  a  similar  scheme,  and  on  a 
larger  scale,  is  that  which  appears  to  have  formed  a  part  of 
Arnolfo's  design  for  the  cathedral  of  Florence.  This  dome 
was  never  executed,  and  our  knowledge  of  it  is  derived  from 
the  well-known  fresco  in  the  Spanish  chapel  of  Santa  Maria 
Novella.^  Here  both  the  dome  and  the  drum  are  octagonal  in 
conformity  with  the  plan  of  the  part  of  the  building  which  it 
covers.     The  outline  (Fig.  4)  is  slightly  pointed,  but  the  sides 


Fig.  4.  —  Dome  of  Arnolfo. 


are  nevertheless  so  much  curved  in  elevation  that  a  structure 
of  this  form  would  not  stand  without  strong  cinctures.  It  is, 
however,  not  unlikely  that  the  fresco  painter  has  given  it  a 
more  bulging  shape  than  Arnolfo  intended.  But  domes  of  this 
character  were  exceptional  in  the  Middle  Ages.  The  builders 
of  that  epoch  confined  their  practice  for  the  most  part  to  the 

1  I  have  not  examined  the  dome  of  Pisa  closely  on  the  spot,  but  I  suppose  it  is 
bound  with  a  chain,  as  we  know  was  the  custom  at  a  later  time.     Cf.  Fontana,  vol.  2, 

P-  363- 

2  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  dome  represented  in  this  fresco  embodies  the 
original  project  of  Arnolfo,  though  this  has  been  questioned.  Cf.  Guasti,  Santa 
Maria  del  Fiore,  etc.,  Florence,  1887,  pp.  Ix-lxi. 


14 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


safer  form  in  which  the  vault  is  made  to  spring  from  within 
the  drum,  and  is  thus  necessarily,  either  in  part  or  entirely, 
hidden  from  external  view, 

A  remarkable  dome  of  this  latter  class  is  that  of  the  Bap- 
tistery of  Florence,  which,  though  the  building  has  undergone 
various  superficial  transformations  since  its  original  construction 
at  an  early,  though  uncertain,  epoch,  has  come  down  to  us  in 
essential  integrity.  This  building  on  plan  is  in  the  form  of  an 
octagon,  and  the  dome  is  of  corresponding  shape,  and  sprung 


Fig.  5.  —  Section  of  Baptistery. 


from  a  level  far  below  the  top  of  the  enclosing  walls.  In  ele 
vation  the  dome  (Fig.  5)  has  a  pointed  outline,  and  is  covered 
by  a  pyramidal  roof  of  stone  the  upper  part  of  which  is  incor- 
porated with  the  dome  itself,  while  beneath  the  lower  portion 
is  a  void  between  the  dome  and  the  enclosing  wall.  The  structure 
has  an  internal  anatomy  that  is  both  ingenious  and  admirable. 
The  span  is  about  25  metres,  and  the  wall  at  the  level  of  the 
springing  is  over  3  metres  thick.  Above  this  the  wall  {a,  Fig.  5) 
rises  to  a  height  of  about  8  metres.  The  dome  at  its  base  is 
about  I  metre  thick,  and  its  extrados  rises  vertically  to  a  height 


THE  DOME  OF  FLORENCE 


15 


Fig.  6.  —  Dissection  of  the  vault  of  the  Baptistery. 


of  about  2\  metres,  leaving  an  open  space  between  it  and  the 
wall  of  the  enclosing  drum  of  1.26  metres  in  width.  Above 
this  vertical  portion  the  extrados  is  stepped  by  several  courses 
of  masonry,  somewhat  after  the  manner  of  the  dome  of  the 
Pantheon.  From  the  reentrant  angles  of  the  octagon  {a,  Fig.  6) 
solid  abutments  are 
built  up  against  the 
salient  angles  of  the 
vault,  and,  between 
these,  two  secondary 
abutments  (^)are  car- 
ried up  against  each 
of  its  sides.  These 
buttresses  are  in  the 
form  of  cross  walls 
dividing  the  space  on 
each  side  of  the  octagon  into  three  compartments,  and  over 
each  of  these  compartments  a  barrel  vault,  on  an  axis  inclined 
in  conformity  with  the  slope  of  the  roof,  is  turned.  The  upper 
ends  of  these  vaults  intersect  on  the  surface  of  the  dome,  as 
shown  in  Figures  5  and  6,  The  voids  between  the  crowns  of 
these  vaults  and  the  buttresses  are  filled  in  with  masonry  so  as 
to  form  the  sloping  planes  of  the  roof  below  where  it  is  in- 
corporated with  the  dome,  and  on  these  are  laid  the  slabs  that 
form  the  external  covering.  With  such  an  effective  buttress 
system  as  is  here  provided  it  is  hard  to  find  a  reason  for  the 
chain  of  timbers  which  is  inserted  at  the  haunch  of  the  dome. 
The  constructive  principle  embodied  in  this  monument  is  alto- 
gether sound, ^  and  its  architectural  character  is  in  keeping  with 
the  construction.^ 

Such  were  the  models  of  mediaeval  dome  building  accessible 
to  Brunelleschi  when  he  was  forming  his  great  scheme  for  the 
covering  of  the  octagon  of  the  cathedral  of  Florence.  But  the 
idea  of  a  low  dome,  or  a  hidden  dome,  could  not  meet  the  wishes 


^  This  needs  to  be  qualified.  The  thrusts  of  the  dome  being  continuous  logically 
call  for  continuous  abutment,  as  in  the  Pantheon,  but  the  intervals  between  the 
abutting  members  are  so  small  that  the  resistance  is  practically  continuous. 

'^  By  its  architectural  character,  I  mean  its  character  as  a  work  of  art.  By  the 
term  "  architecture "  we  properly  mean  not  building  merely,  but  the  fine  art  of 
beautiful  building. 


l6  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

of  the  Florentines  of  the  fifteenth  century.  Their  civic  pride 
and  large  resources  called  for  an  imposing  design  which  should 
make  the  dome  a  dominant  architectural  feature  of  their  city. 
It  was  decided  that  it  should  be  raised  upon  the  top  of  a  high 
drum,  and  the  task  to  which  Brunelleschi  appHed  himself  was 
to  fulfil  this  requirement. 

Of  the  vast  and  soaring  dome  which  he  succeeded  in 
erecting  many  opinions  have  been  held,  but  all  beholders  are 
impressed  with  its  grandeur.  It  has  been  common  to  speak  as 
if  the  master  had  been  chiefly  inspired  by  the  ancient  monu- 
ments of  Rome,  and  had  taken  the  Pantheon  as  his  principal 
model. ^  But  although  he  came  to  his  task  fresh  from  the  study 
of  the  ancient  Roman  monuments,  and  undoubtedly  had  the 
Pantheon  much  in  mind,  yet  the  dome  which  he  produced  has 
little  in  common  with  that  great  achievement  of  imperial  Roman 
constructive  skill.  In  general  it  follows,  though  with  great 
improvements  as  to  outline  and  proportions,  the  scheme  of 
Arnolf o  as  illustrated  in  the  fresco  of  the  Spanish  Chapel ;  but 
the  model  to  which  it  most  closely  conforms,  notwithstanding 
the  obvious  and  essential  points  of  difference,  is  that  of  the 
Baptistery  just  described.  There  can,  I  think,  be  Httle  question 
that  this  monument  supplied  the  chief  inspiration  and  guidance 
to  both  Arnolfo  and  Brunelleschi.  A  comparison  will  show 
that  the  dome  of  the  cathedral,  with  its  supporting  drum,  is,  in 
fact,  little  other  than  a  reproduction  of  the  Baptistery  of  San 
Giovanni  in  a  modified  form,  and  enlarged  proportions,  raised 
over  the  crossing. 

But  while  taking  the  scheme  of  the  Baptistery  as  the  basis 
of  his  own  scheme,  Brunelleschi  was  obhged  to  make  some  daring 
changes  in  order  to  give  his  design  the  external  character  which 
he  sought.  This  great  dome  (Plate  I),  like  that  of  the  Baptis- 
tery, is  octagonal  in  plan  and  pointed  in  elevation.  It  rises  from 
the  top  of  the  octagonal  drum,  and  consists  of  two  nearly  con- 
centric shells  of  masonry,  with  an  interval  between  them. 
Eight  vast  ribs  of  stone  rise  from  the  angles  of  the  drum  and 

^  This  has  been  based  on  the  affirmations  of  Vasari,  who  states  that  it  was  Bru- 
nelleschi's  purpose  to  "  restore  to  light  the  good  \i.e.  the  ancient  Roman]  manner 
in  architecture,"  and  that  he  had  "pondered  on  the  difficulties"  involved  in  vaulting 
the  Pantheon.  Cf.  Le  Opere  di  Giorgio  Vasari,  Milanesi  edition,  Rorence,  l88o, 
vol.  2,  p.  337. 


Plate  I 


DOME  OF  BRUNKLLESCHI 
F'Jorence 


II 


THE  DOME  OF  FLORENCE 


17 


converge  on  the  curb  of  an  opening  at  the  crown.  These  ribs 
extend  in  depth  through  the  whole  thickness  of  the  double  vault 
and  unite  its  two  shells.  Between  each  pair  of  these  great  ribs 
two  lesser  ones  are  inserted  within  the  interval  that  divides  the 
two  shells,  and  nine  arches  of  masonry,  lying  in  planes  normal 


System  of  the  dome. 


to  the  curve,  are  sprung  between  the  great  ribs  and  pass 
through  the  lesser  ones  on  each  side  of  the  polygon  (Figs.  7 
and  8),  while  a  chain  of  heavy  timbers  {a,  Fig.  8,  and  Fig.  9),  in 
twenty-four  sections,  clamped  together  at  the  ends  with  plates 
of  iron,  binds  the  whole  system  between  the  haunch  and  the 
springing.  So  much  of  the  internal  structure  can  be  seen  in 
c 


ARCHITECTURE   OF  THE  REIVAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


the  monument  itself,  but  further  details  are  described  in  Bru- 
nelleschi's  own  account  of  what  he  intended  to  do.^     From  this 


Fig.  8.  —  Section. 

*  A  copy  of  this  document  is  said  to  have  been 
preserved  for  some  time  in  the  archives  of  the  Board 
of  Works,  but  it  seems  to  have  disappeared  subse- 
quently. It  is  given,  however,  by  several  writers, 
Vasari  and  Guasti  among  them.  There  are  slight 
differences  of  wording  and  of  measurements  between 
the  transcripts  of  these  two  authors.  That  of  Guasti 
is  the  most  intelligible,  and  seems  to  agree  best  with 


Fig.  9.  —  Part  Plan. 


II  THE  DOME  OF  FLORENCE  19 

we  learn  that  the  base  of  the  dome,  which  was  to  be  built  solid 
to  the  height  of  5^  braccia,  was  to  consist  of  six  courses  of  long 
blocks  of  hard  stone  {jnacigno)  clamped  with  tinned  iron  and  upon 
this  were  to  be  chains  of  iron.^  Mention  is  also  made  of  a 
chain  of  iron  over  the  timber  chain  ("  in  su  dette  quercie  una 
catena  di  ferro  ");  but  no  such  chain  is  visible  in  the  monument, 

the  monument.  It  reads  as  follows :  "  In  prima  :  la  cupola,  dallo  lato  di  dentro 
lunga  a  misura  di  quintoacuto,  negli  angoli  sia  grossa  nella  mossa  da  pie  braccia  3|, 
e  piramidalmente  si  muri;  sicche  nella  fine,  congiunta  con  1'  occhio  di  sopra,  che  ha 
a  essere  fondamento  e  basa  della  lanterna,  rimanga  grossa  braccia  2.\.  Facciasi  un' 
altra  cupola  di  fuori  sopra  questa,  per  conservarla  dallo  umido,  e  perche  la  torni  piu 
magnifica  e  gonfiata;  e  sia  grossa  nella  sua  mossa  da  pie  braccia  \\,  e  piramidalmente 
segua,  che  insino  all'  occhio  rimanga  braccia  |. 

"  El  vano  che  rimarra  da  1'  una  cupola  all'  altra,  sia  da  pie  braccia  2  :  nel  quale 
vano  si  metta  le  scale  per  potere  cercare  tutto  tra  1'  una  cupola  e  1'  altra;  e  finisca 
'1  detto  vano  a  1*  occhio  di  sopra  braccia  2^. 

"  Sieno  fatti  ventiquattro  sproni,  che  otto  ne  sieno  negli  angoli  e  sedici  nelle  fac- 
cie :  ciascuno  sprone  negli  angoli  grosso  dappie  braccia  sette.  Dalla  parte  di  dentro, 
e  di  fuori,  nel  mezzo  di  detti  angoli,  in  ciascuna  faccia,  sia  due  sproni;  ciascuno  grosso 
dappie  braccia  quattro  ;  e  lunghe  insieme  le  dette  due  volte,  piramidalmente  murate 
insieme  insino  alia  sommitS.  dell'  occhio  inchiuso  dalla  lanterna,  per  iguale  pro- 
porzione. 

"  I  detti  ventiquattro  sproni  con  le  dette  cupole  sieno  cinti  intorno  di  sei  cerchi 
di  forti  macigni,  e  lunghi,  e  bene  sprangati  di  ferro  stagnato;  e  di  sopra  a  detti 
macigni,  catene  di  ferro  che  cingano  d'  intorno  la  detta  volta,  co'  loro  sproni.  Hassi 
a  murare  di  sodo,  nel  principio  braccia  5^^  per  altezza;  e  poi  seguano  gli  sproni,  e 
dividansi  le  volte. 

"  El  primo  e  secondo  cerchio,  alto  braccia  2  ;  e  '1  terzo  e  quarto,  alto  braccia  1^ ; 
e  '1  quinto  e  sesto  cerchio,  alto  braccia  i  :  ma  '1  primo  circhio  dappie  sia,  oltre  a  cio, 
afforzato  con  macigni  lunghi  per  lo  traverso,  si  che  1'  una  volta  e  1'  altra  della  cupola 
si  posi  in  su  detti  macigni. 

"  E  nell'  altezza  d'  ogni  braccia  12,  o  circa,  delle  dette  volte,  sieno  volticciuole  a 
botte  tra  1'  uno  sprone  e  1'  altro,  per  andito  alia  detta  cupola;  e  sotto  le  dette  voltic- 
ciuole, tra  r  uno  sprone  e  1'  altro,  sieno  catene  di  querela  grosse,  che  leghino  i  detti 
sproni  e  cingano  la  volta  dentro;   e  in  su  detti  quercie  una  catena  di  ferro. 

"  Gli  sproni  murati  tutti  di  pietra  di  macigno  e  pietra  forte,  e  le  facce  della  cupola 
tutte  di  pietra  forte,  legate  con  sprone  insino  all'  altezza  di  braccia  24 :  e  da  indi  in  su 
si  muri  di  mattoni  o  di  spugna,  secondo  che  si  delibererJi  per  chi  allora  1'  avrk  a  fare, 
piu  leggieri  che  pietra. 

"...  Murinsi  le  cupola  nel  modo  di  sopra,  senz'  alcuna  armadura,  massime 
irsino  a  braccia  30  ;  ma  da  indi  in  su,  in  quel  modo  che  sar^  consigliato  e  deliberato 
per  quei  maestri  che  1'  avranno  a  murare :  perche  nel  murare  la  pratica  insegna 
([uello  che  si  ha  da  seguire."  —  Guasti,  La  Cupola  di  Santa  Maria  del  Fiore,  Florence, 
1857,  pp.  28-30. 

1  Durm,  Die  Dom  Kuppel  in  Florenz,  etc.,  Berlin,  1887,  Plate  I,  gives  an  admi- 
rable illustration  of  the  internal  system  of  this  remarkable  dome,  and  shows  the 
masonry  of  the  solid  base  with  its  clamps  and  chains,  as  described  in  the  document 
quoted  by  Guasti  (note,  p.  18). 


20  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

and  if  it  exists,  it  must  be  embedded  in  the  masonry  of  the 
vault,  like  the  chains  at  the  base. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  while  Brunelleschi's  scheme  is  essen- 
tially different  from  that  of  the  Baptistery,  its  structural  sys- 
tem is  little  more  than  an  ingenious  modification  of  it.  The 
parts  of  the  one  answer  to  those  of  the  other  with  singular  com- 
pleteness. The  attic  wall  and  pyramidal  roof  of  San  Giovanni 
are  transformed  into  the  external  shell  of  the  cathedral  dome, 
the  angle  buttresses  of  the  older  monument  become  the  great 
angle  ribs  of  Brunelleschi's  vault.  The  intermediate  abutments 
of  the  Baptistery  are  changed  into  the  intermediate  ribs  of  the 
great  dome,  and  the  incUned  barrel  vaults  of  the  Baptistery 
scheme  are  represented  in  the  cathedral  dome  by  the  arches 
sprung  between  the  great  angle  ribs. 

It  has  been  thought  by  some  writers  that  the  rib  system  of 
the  dome  of  Florence  gives  the  structure  a  somewhat  Gothic 
character,  and  it  is  sometimes  called  a  Gothic  dome.^  But  there 
can  be  no  such  thing  as  a  Gothic  dome.  It  is  impossible  for  a 
dome  of  any  kind  to  have  the  character  of  a  Gothic  vault. 
The  difference  between  the  two  is  fundamental.  A  Gothic 
vault  is  a  vault  of  concentrated  thrusts,  and  it  requires  effective 
concentrated  abutments.  A  dome  is  a  vault  of  continuous 
thrust,  and  for  sound  construction  it  requires  continuous  abut- 
ments, as  in  the  Pantheon.  Whatever  use  the  ribs  of  Brunel- 
leschi's vault  may  have,  they  do  not,  and  cannot,  perform  the 
function  of  the  ribs  in  Gothic  vaulting.  Their  use  is  to 
strengthen  the  angles  of  the  dome,  and  to  augment  its  power 
of  resistance  to  the  weight  of  the  lantern  which  crowns  it. 
They  do  not  support  the  vault  as  the  ribs  of  a  Gothic  vault  do. 
Being  composed  of  very  deep  voussoirs,  they  have  more 
strength  to  withstand  thrusts,  as  well  as  to  bear  crushing 
weight,  than  the  enclosing  shells  have,  and  thus  to  some  extent 
they  may  hold  these  shells  in.  But  it  appears  plain  that  the 
architect  did  not  feel  confidence  in  their  power  to  perform  this 
function  without  reenforcement  by  a  chain,  or  chains,  which,  in 
his  own  words,  "  bind  the  ribs  and  hold  the  vault  in  "  (che  le- 
ghino  i  detti  sproni  e  cingano  la  volta  dentro).     However  this 

^  This  idea  finds  expression  in  the  latest  work  that  I  have  seen  on  the  subject : 
Die  Kuppel  des  Domes  Santa  Maria  del  I-iore  zti  Florence.  Von  Paul  Wenz,  Berlin, 
I901,  p.  52 ;   also  in  Durm,  Die  Baukunst  der  Renaissance  in  Italien,  p.  406. 


n  THE  DOME  OF  FLORENCE  21 

may  be,  the  ribs  of  a  dome  cannot  have  any  function  Hke  that 
of  the  ribs  in  Gothic  vaulting.  The  shell  of  a  Gothic  vault  is 
not  held  in  by  the  ribs,  nor  is  it  in  any  way  incorporated  with 
them.  Both  shell  and  ribs  are  held  in  by  the  buttresses.  This 
point  will  be  considered  further  in  connection  with  the  dome 
of  St.  Peter's. 

The  whole  scheme  of  this  dome  was  a  daring  innovation  of 
one  man,  and  in  this  it  differs  from  former  architectural  innova- 
tions, which  were  the  comparatively  slow  outcome  of  corporate 
endeavour,  progressive  changes  being  so  gradual  that  no  wide 
or  sudden  departures  from  habitual  modes  of  building  were 
made  at  any  one  time,  or  by  any  one  person. 

It  was  a  prodigious  undertaking.  The  span  of  the  dome  is 
nearly  a  hundred  and  forty  feet,  the  springing  level  is  a  hundred 
and  seventy-five  feet  above  the  pavement,  and  the  height  of  the 
dome  itself,  exclusive  of  the  lantern,  is  about  a  hundred  and  twenty 
feet.  Such  a  project  might  well  appall  the  most  courageous  of 
building  committees,  and  we  need  not  wonder  that  the  Board  of 
Works  drew  back  in  dismay  when  it  was  first  laid  before  them.^ 
The  successful  accomplishment  of  the  work,  and  the  stability 
which  it  has  thus  far  maintained,  show  that  the  architect  was  a 
constructor  of  great  abihty,^  and  the  fact  that  he  managed  to 
raise  the  vast  fabric  without  the  use  of  the  ponderous  and  costly 
kind  of  centring  that  had  been  commonly  employed  in  vaulting, 
makes  the  achievement  still  more  remarkable.  The  precise 
manner  in  which  he  did  this  is  not  clear,  but  of  the  fact  there 
appears  no  question.^ 

^  For  a  full  account  of  the  deliberations  held,  as  well  as  for  much  else  of  impor- 
tance relating  to  the  building  of  this  dome,  see  Professor  C.  E.  Norton's  Church 
Building  in  the  Middle  Ages,  New  York,  Harper  &  Brothers,  l88o. 

2  Hut  while  Brunelleschi  appears  to  have  had  great  natural  constructive  aptitude,  he 
had  not  had  a  sound  training  or  experience  in  construction.  Such  training  would  have 
taught  him  that  it  would  not  do,  under  any  circumstances,  to  spring  a  vault  from  the 
top  of  a  wall,  and  he  ought  to  have  learned  this  from  his  study  of  the  ancient  Roman 
monuments. 

3  Nelli,  Discorsi  di  Archiiettura,  Florence,  1753,  p.  74,  reproduces  an  old 
drawing  which  purports  to  show  the  form  of  the  scaffolding  that  Brunelleschi 
employed.  This  drawing  bears  the  following  inscription  :  "Questa  Dimostrazione  e 
di  Filippo  Brunelleschi  Architetto  fatta  per  e  Ponti  della  Cupola  di  S.  M'ra.  del  Fiore 
di  Firenze  nell'  Anno  M.CCCCXIX  e  fu  quella  che  mostrd  quando  fu  lasciato  in 
liberty  di  dover  esser  solo  nell'  operazione  di  d."  cupola  senza  il  Ghiberti  suo  com- 
pagno   non  avendola   voluta   dar   fuori   prima   di  non  essere   libero   Architetto  di 


22  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

The  dome  of  Florence  is  indeed  a  remarkable  piece  of  con- 
struction, and  it  is  no  less  remarkable  as  a  work  of  art.  In 
beauty  of  outline  it  has  not,  I  think,  been  approached  by  any 
of  the  later  elevated  domes  of  which  it  is  the  parent.  Yet  with 
all  of  its  mechanical  and  artistic  merit,  the  scheme  is  funda- 
mentally false  in  principle,  since  it  involves  a  departure  from 
sound  methods  of  dome  construction.  A  bulging  thin  shell  of 
masonry  on  a  large  scale  cannot  be  made  secure  without  abut- 
ment, much  less  can  such  a  shell  sustain  the  weight  of  a  heavy 
stone  structure  like  the  lantern  of  this  monument,  without 
resort  to  the  extraneous  means  of  binding  chains.  A  builder 
having  proper  regard  for  true  principles  of  construction  in 
stone  masonry  would  not  undertake  such  a  work.  For  although 
it  may  be  possible  to  give  the  dome  a  shape  that  will  be  meas- 
urably self-sustaining  as  to  thrusts,  as  Brunelleschi  clearly  strove 
to  do,^  it  is  not  possible  to  make  it  entirely  so,  and  therefore  if 
deprived  of  abutment  it  must  be  bound  with  chains.  But  a 
structure  of  masonry  which  depends  for  stability  on  binding 
chains  is  one  of  inherent  weakness,  and  thus  of  false  character.^ 

From  these  considerations  it  appears  to  me  that  Brunel- 
leschi led  the  way  in  a  wrong  direction,  notwithstanding  the 
nobility  of  his  achievement  from  many  points  of  view.  And 
in  following  his  example  modern  designers  of  elevated  domes 

d*  Opera ;  come  sentiranno  nella  sua  Vita  scritta  da  Diversi."  Brunelleschi,  in  his 
account  of  his  intentions  before  the  Board  of  Works  (note,  p.  19),  would  not  explain 
his  scheme  for  the  scaffolding.  He  said  merely  that  the  vault  was  to  be  raised,  with- 
out centring,  to  the  height  of  30  braccia,  and  from  that  level  upwards,  in  the  manner 
that  should  be  advised  by  those  who  might  then  have  the  work  in  charge. 

1  In  his  explanation  of  his  scheme  before  the  Board  of  Works,  as  given  by 
Vasari,  Brunelleschi  begins  as  follows:  "Considerato  le  difficult^  di  questa  fabbrica, 
magnifici  Signori  Operaj,  trovo  che  non  si  puo  per  nessun  modo  volgerla  tonda  per- 
fetta,  atteso  che  sarebbe  tanto  grande  il  piano  di  sopra,  dove  va  la  lanterna,  che 
mettendovi  peso  rovinerebbe  presto."     Op.  cit.,  vol.  2,  p.  347. 

2  It  may  be  thought  that  this  would  condemn  the  use  of  metal  clamps  in 
masonry,  such  as  were  inserted  in  the  walls  of  the  Parthenon,  or  the  wooden  ties  that 
were,  in  some  cases,  used  in  parts  of  Gothic  buildings.  But  there  is  a  wide  differ- 
ence between  such  use  of  clamps  and  ties,  and  the  binding  chains  of  the  great  domes 
of  the  Renaissance.  In  the  Greek  and  Gothic  work  the  masonry  forms  are  favour- 
able to  stability  independently  of  the  clamps  and  ties.  These  were  inserted  either 
for  security  against  unusual  dangers,  as  from  earthquakes,  or  for  temporary  security 
against  rupture  while  the  work  was  in  progress,  before  the  interaction  of  the  parts 
of  the  system  was  fully  established  ;  but  a  dome  without  abutment  violates  the  con- 
stant conditions  of  stabilitv. 


U  THE  DOME  OF  FLORENCE  23 

have  wandered  still  farther,  as  we  shall  see,  from  the  true  path 
of  monumental  art. 

Moreover,  when  we  consider  that  a  dome  set  within  its 
drum  is  not  only  stronger,  but  that  it  is  also  much  better  for 
interior  effect,  the  dome  of  the  Pantheon  still  remaining  the 
grandest  and  most  impressive  arched  ceiling  of  its  kind  in  the 
world,  the  unbuttressed  modern  domes,  with  their  manifold 
extraneous  and  hidden  devices  for  security,  appear  still  less 
defensible. 

But  in  the  architectural  thought  of  the  Renaissance  little 
heed  was  given  to  structural  propriety  or  structural  expression, 
and  the  Italian  writers,  who  have  largely  shaped  our  modern 
architectural  ideas,  have  not  only  failed  to  recognize  the  inher- 
ent weakness  of  such  a  building  as  the  dome  of  Florence,  but 
have  even  considered  the  work  praiseworthy  on  account  of  those 
very  characteristics  which  make  it  weak.  Thus  Sgrilli  lauds 
Brunelleschi  for  having  had  the  "  hardihood  to  raise  to  such  a 
height  the  greatest  cupola  which  until  its  time  had  ever  been 
seen,  upon  a  base  without  any  abutments,  a  thing  that  had  not 
before  been  done  by  any  one."  ^  And  Milizia  says,  "  It  is  worthy 
of  special  notice  that  in  the  construction  of  this  cupola  there 
are  no  visible  abutments."^ 

As  to  the  permanent  stability  of  this  dome  various  opinions 
have  been  held  by  the  experts  among  the  older  writers.^  Its 
form  is,  as  we  have  seen,  as  favourable  to  stability  as  it  would 
be  possible  to  make  that  of  any  vault  which  could  be  properly 
called  a  dome.  It  appears  to  the  inexperienced  eye  as  stable 
as  a  crest  of  the  Apennines.  Every  precaution  as  to  material 
and  careful  workmanship  seems  to  have  been  taken  to  make  it 
secure.  The  wall  of  the  drum  on  which  it  rests  is  five  metres 
in  thickness,  and  the  soHd  base  of  the  dome  itself  is  built,  if  the 
architect's  scheme  was  carried  out  as  he  had  stated  it  before 
the  Board  of  Works,  of  large  blocks  of  hard  stone,  thoroughly 
bonded  and  clamped  with  iron.  The  lower  system  is  sufficiently 
strong,  and  appears  to  rest  on  a  solid  foundation.  But  never- 
theless there   are    ruptures  in  various    parts  of   the   structure 

1  Discrizione  e  Studj  delV  Insigne  Fahbrica  di  S.  Maria  del  Fiore,  Florence, 
1733.  P-  ""i. 

2  Memorie  degli  Architette,  etc.,  Horence,  1785,  vol.  i,  p.  190. 
^  Fontana,  Nelli,  Cecchini,  and  others. 


24  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

which  have  caused  apprehensions  of  danger,^  and  its  future 
duration  must  be  regarded  as  uncertain.  The  writers  who  have 
maintained  that  it  is  secure  have  argued  on  the  assumption  that 
the  parts  of  a  dome  all  tend  toward  the  centre.^  These  writers 
overlook  the  fact  that  the  force  of  gravity  above,  especially 
when  the  dome  is  heavily  weighed  by  a  lantern,  neutralizes 
the  inward  tendency  of  the  lower  parts  and  causes  a 
tendency  in  those  parts  to  movement  in  the  opposite  direc- 
tion. This  neutralizing  force  is  lessened  by  giving  the  dome 
a  pointed  form,  as  Brunelleschi  has  done,  but,  as  before 
remarked  (p.  22),  it  can  hardly  be  overcome  entirely  so  long  as 
any  real  dome  shape  is  preserved.'^ 

It  may  be  thought  that  the  object  which  Brunelleschi  had  in 
view,  of  producing  a  vast  dome  that  should  be  an  imposing 
feature  of  the  cathedral  externally,  justifies  the  unsound  method 
of  construction  to  which  he  resorted  (the  only  method  by  which 
the  effect  that  he  sought  could  be  attained).  But  structural 
integrity  is,  I  think,  so  fundamental  a  prerequisite  of  good 
architecture  that  in  so  far  as  this  gifted  Florentine  was  obliged 
to  ignore  sound  principles  of  construction  in  order  to  attain  an 
end  not  compatible  with  such  principles,  the  result  cannot  be 


1  These  ruptures  were  first  observed  in  the  year  1693  (Nelli,  op.  cii.,  p.  13),  and 
it  was  then  advised  by  the  architect  Carlo  Fontana  to  add  a  new  chain  of  iron.  Nelli, 
however,  argued  that  the  fissures  had  not  arisen  from  thrust,  but  were  due  to  a  slight 
yielding  of  the  foundations,  and  he  urged  that  no  chain  be  added,  but  that  a  bit  of 
marble  be  dove-tailed  into  the  vault  across  the  opening,  in  order  that  any  further 
movement  might  be  detected  by  the  breakmg  of  this  marble.  For  three  years  no 
further  sign  of  disturbance  was  noticed,  but  a  slight  earthquake  in  1697  broke  a  por- 
tion of  the  masonry  of  the  outer  face  of  the  dome  opposite  the  fissure  across  which 
the  marble  had  been  placed.  It  appears,  however,  to  have  been  concluded  that 
there  was  still  no  danger  from  thrust,  and  no  new  chain  v/zs  inserted.  Cecchini 
( Opinione  intorno  lo  Stato  della  gran  Cupola  del  Duo/no  di  Firenze,  published 
together  with  Nelli's  Discorsi,  etc.,  p.  82)  speaks  of  several  cracks  in  both  the  inner 
and  the  outer  shells  of  the  vault,  and  also  in  the  supporting  piers,  even  down  to  the 
ground.  But  he  agrees  with  Nelli  in  attributing  these  to  movements  of  the  founda- 
tions from  which  he  concludes  that  no  further  danger  is  to  be  apprehended,  and  he 
affirms  that  the  structure  is  entirely  safe. 

-  Cf.  Nelli,  op.  cit.,  p.  73. 

^  The  thrusts  of  a  hemispherical  dome  are,  in  some  degree,  restrained  by  the 
binding  of  its  continuous  courses  of  masonry  under  compression,  but  this  is  not 
enough  for  security,  as  experience  has  shown  ;  and  in  a  polygonal  dome,  like  Brunel- 
leschi's,  there  is  no  such  binding  force,  because  there  are  no  continuous  circles  of 
masonry. 


Libriry  of 
ALFRED  W.  REA. 

n  THE  DOME  OF  FLORENCE  25 

properly  considered  as  an  entirely  noble  and  exemplary  work  of 
art,  however  much  beauty  and  impressiveness  it  may  have. 

The  example  set  by  Brunelleschi  was,  in  point  of  construc- 
tion, a  pernicious  one,  and  bore  fruit  of  a  still  more  objectionable 
character  in  the  works  of  other  gifted  men  less  scrupulous  than 
he,  and  less  endowed  with  mechanical  ingenuity,  as  we  shall  see 
farther  on. 

Though  there  is  nothing  whatever  of  classic  Roman  character 
in  this  great  dome,  the  lantern  which  crowns  it,  built  from  Bru- 
nelleschi's  design  after  his  death,  has  classic  details  curiously 
mingled  with  mediaeval  forms.  Its  eight  piers  are  adorned 
with  fluted  Corinthian  pilasters  surmounted  by  an  entablature, 
while  the  jambs  of  the  openings  have  engaged  columns  carrying 
arches  beneath  the  entablature  in  ancient  Roman  fashion. 
From  the  entablature  rises  a  low  spire  with  finials  set  about  its 
base,  and  flying  buttresses,  adorned  with  classic  details,  are  set 
against  the  piers.  None  of  the  classic  details  have  any  true 
classic  character,  nor  has  the  ornamental  carving,  with  which 
the  composition  is  enriched,  any  particular  excellence  either  of 
design  or  execution.  But  these  details  are  invisible  from  the 
ground,  and  in  its  general  form  and  jjroportions  the  lantern 
makes  an  admirable  crowning  feature  of  this  finest  of  Renais- 
sance domes. 


CHAPTER    III 

CHURCH    ARCHITECTURE    OF    THE    FLORENTINE    RENAISSANCE 

No  Other  work  by  Brunelleschi  is  comparable  in  merit  to 
the  great  dome  of  the  cathedral.  None  of  his  other  opportuni- 
ties were  such  as  to  call  forth  his  best  powers,  which  appear 


Fig,  io.  —  Plan  of  the  chapel  of  the  Pazzi, 

to  have  required  great  magnitude  to  bring  them  into  full  play. 
In  his  other  works  the  influence  of  his  Roman  studies  is  more 
manifest,  and  his  own  genius  is  less  apparent.  In  these  other 
works  he  revives  the  use  of  the  orders,  and  employs  them  in 

26 


CHAP.  Ill 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


27 


modes  which  for   incongruity  surpass   anything   that   imperial 
Roman  taste  had  devised. 

The  first  of  these  works  is  the  small  chapel  of  the  Pazzi  in 
the  cloister  of  Santa  Croce.  It  is  a  simple  rectangle  on  plan 
(Fig.    10),  with  a  square  sanctuary  on  the  short  axis,   and  a 


Fig.  II.  —  Section  of  vault  of  the  Pazzi  chapel. 


porch  across  the  front.  The  central  area  is  covered  with  a 
circular  vault  which  by  most  writers  is  called  a  dome,  but  it  is 
not  a  dome ;  it  is  a  vault  of  essentially  Gothic  form,  like  two 
early  Gothic  apse  vaults  joined  together  (Fig.  11).  It  rests  on 
pendentives,  and  is  enclosed  by  a  cylindrical  drum,  which  forms 


28 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


an  effective,  though  not  a  logical,  abutment  to  its  thrusts,  and 
is  covered  with  a  low-pitched  roof  of  masonry  having  a  slightly 
curved  outline.  Whether  this  external  covering  is  connected 
with  the  vaulting  in  any  way  above  where  it  parts  from  the 
crowns  of  the  vault  cells  it  is  impossible  to  discover,  because 
there  is  no  way  of  access  to  the  open  space  between  the  two 
parts.  Through  a  small  opening  in  the  outer  shell,  near  its 
crown,  the  hand  may  be  thrust  into  the  void,  but  nothing  can 


Fig.  12.  —  Interior  of  the  Pazzi  chapel. 

be  reached.  It  is  a  curious  form  of  double  vault,  and  differs 
fundamentally  from  the  great  double  dome  of  the  cathedral. 
The  scheme  as  a  whole  is  structurally  inconsistent ;  for  while 
the  inner  vault  has  the  concentrated  thrusts  of  Gothic  construc- 
tion, these  thrusts  are  met  by  the  enclosing  drum,  and  not  by 
the  isolated  abutments  that  the  vault  logically  calls  for.  The 
sanctuary  has  a  small  hemispherical  dome  on  pendentives,  and 
the  portico  is  covered  with  a  barrel  vault  bisected  by  another 
small  dome  on  pendentives. 

The  architectural  treatment  of  the  interior  (Fig.  12)  exhibits 


Ill  CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE  29 

a  wide  departure  from  that  of  any  previous  type  of  design.  The 
form  of  the  building  is  mediaeval,  being,  with  exception  of  the 
central  vault,  essentially  Byzantine,^  but  the  details  are  classic 
Roman,  and  consist  of  a  shallow  order  of  fluted  Corinthian 
pilasters  with  the  entablature  at  the  level  of  the  vaulting 
imposts.  In  such  a  building,  however,  and  used  in  this  way, 
a  classic  order  is  out  of  place ;  for  an  order  is  a  structural  sys- 
tem designed  for  structural  use,  but  the  order  here  has  no  more 
structural  function  than  if  it  were  merely  painted  on  the  walls. 
It  is  used,  of  course,  with  a  purely  ornamental  motive,  but  as 
ornament  it  is  inappropriate.  A  proper  ornamental  treatment 
of  such  an  interior  would  be  either  by  marble  incrusting,  mosaic, 
or  fresco,  or  else  by  pilaster  strips,  or  colonnettes,  and  blind 
arches,  which  would  break  the  monotony  of  the  broad  wall 
surfaces  without  suggesting  an  architectural  system  foreign  to 
the  character  of  the  building.  Such  arcading  would  have  an 
appropriate  structural  suggestiveness,  if  not  an  actual  structural 
use ;  but  a  classic  order  is  unsuitable  for  a  building  of  mediaeval 
character.  The  mediaeval  pilaster  strip  and  blind  arcade  were 
designed  for  this  use,  and  they  have  the  further  advantage 
that  their  proportions  may  be  indefinitely  varied  to  meet  varied 
needs,  as  the  proportions  of  the  classic  orders  may  not.  But 
in  their  lack  of  a  true  sense  of  structural  expression,  and  in 
their  eagerness  to  revive  the  use  of  classic  forms,  the  designers 
of  the  Renaissance  failed  to  consider  these  things. 

A  particularly  awkward  result  of  this  improper  use  of  an 
order  is  that  the  entablature  passes  through  the  arch  imposts, 
making  an  irrational  structural  combination.  This  scheme  was, 
however,  extensively  followed  in  the  subsequent  architecture  of 
the  Renaissance,  but  it  is  a  barbarism  for  which  no  authority 
can,    I   believe,  be    found    in    ancient    Roman   design.^      The 

^  The  term  "  Byzantine  "  is  often  applied  loosely  to  buildings  in  which  only  the 
ornamental  details  have  a  Byzantine  character.  But  the  primary  and  distinguishing 
structural  feature  of  Byzantine  architecture  is  the  dome  on  pendentives.  The  Byzan- 
tine features  of  the  Pazzi  are  involved  with  others  derived  from  different  systems,  but 
they  are  very  distinct.  The  central  vault,  though  of  Gothic  form,  is  supported  on 
pendentives,  and  the  true  dome  on  pendentives  occurs,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the 
sanctuary  and  the  porch. 

^  The  entablature  does,  however,  occur  under  vaulting  in  some  provincial  Roman 
buildings,  as  in  the  Pantheon  of  Baalbek,  where  it  forms  the  wall  cornice  from  which 
the  vaulting  springs.  But  this,  though  not  defensible,  is  less  objectionable  than  the 
Renaissance  scheme  of  an  entablature  passing  through  the  imposts  of  archivolts. 


3° 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSAJSTCE 


CHAP, 


nearest  approach  to  it  in  Roman  art  is  the  entablature  block 
resting  on  the  capital  (as  in  the  great  hall  of  the  Baths  of 
Caracalla),  which  was  a  blundering  device  of  the  later  Roman 
architects.  The  complete  entablature  running  through  the 
impost,  as  in  the  chapel  of  the  Pazzi,  sometimes,  indeed,  occurs 
in  the  early  churches  of  Rome  and  elsewhere,^  as  a  result  of 
unsettled  conditions  of  design,  while  the  architects  were  strug- 


FiG.  1 3.  —  Facade  of  the  Pazzi  chapel. 


gling  with  the  traditional  use  of  the  entablature  and  the  intro- 
duction of  the  arch  sprung  from  the  columns.  But  after  the 
admirable  logic  of  the  mediaeval  arched  systems  of  construction 
had  been  reached  it  appears  strange  that  any  designer  should 
go  back  to  this  irrational  combination. 

In  the  portico  (Fig.  13)  the  incongruities  of  design  are  of  a 
still  graver  nature  because  they  involve  weakness  of  construc- 
tion.    The  order  of  the  interior  is,  as  we  have  just  seen,  but  a 

^  As  in  the  arch  of  the  apse  of  St.  Paul  outside  the  wall  at  Rome,  and  in  the 
Baptistery  of  Florence. 


Ill  CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE  31 

simulated  order,  and  has  no  structural  function,  but  in  the  portico 
a  real  Corinthian  order  is  made  to  carry  the  barrel  vault  and 
dome  above  mentioned,  and  an  attic  wall  which  encloses  the 
vaulting.  But  a  classic  order  was  never  intended  for  such  use, 
and  cannot  properly  perform  it.  Such  an  order  is  adapted  only 
to  the  support  of  crushing  weight,  and  has  no  power  of  resist- 
ance to  the  thrusts  of  vaulting.  The  weight  of  the  attic  wall 
tends,  indeed,  in  some  measure  to  neutralize  th^  force  of  the 
vault  thrust,  but  this  is  not  enough  to  render  the  structure 
secure,  and  unless  the  order  were  effectively  steadied  by  some 
extraneous  means  the  attic  load  would  constitute  a  source  of 
danger,  as  with  any  disturbance  of  its  equilibrium  by  thrust  its 
weight  would  hasten  the  overthrow  of  the  system.  How  it  is 
actually  maintained  is  not  apparent.  No  tie  rods  are  visible 
beneath  the  vault,  such  as  are  common  in  Italian  vaulted  struc- 
tures, which  are  rarely  buttressed  in  an  effective  manner.  Ties 
or  clamps  may,  however,  be  concealed  within  the  attic,  though 
they  would  be  less  effective  so  placed.  But  in  whatever  way 
the  system  is  held  together,  it  is  bad  architecture,  because  the 
parts  have  no  proper  adaptation  to  their  functions. 

The  ornamental  treatment  of  the  attic  wall  is  worthy  of  notice. 
The  surface  is  divided  into  panels  by  diminutive  pilasters,  and 
these  panels  are  subdivided  by  mouldings  in  a  manner  which 
recalls  the  treatment  of  the  attic  of  the  Baptistery.  The  coup- 
ling of  the  pilasters  was  an  innovation  in  the  use  of  classic 
members,  but  it  enabled  the  architect  to  avoid  unpleasant  pro- 
portions in  these  details.  Single  pilasters  of  the  same  magni- 
tude would  be  too  slender  for  the  deep  entablature  over  them, 
or  to  harmonize  with  the  great  Corinthian  order  below,  while 
wider  single  ones  would  be  stumpy  and  inelegant.  The  pair 
give  good  proportion  in  the  total  composition,  while  each 
pilaster  is  well  proportioned  in  itself.  Another  noticeable  point 
is  the  manner  in  which  the  central  archivolt  and  the  archivolts 
spanning  the  ends  of  the  porch  intersect  the  pilasters  at  the 
springing.  This  could  not  be  avoided,  because  the  pilasters 
cover  the  whole  space  on  the  entablature  over  the  capitals  of 
the  columns,  and  leave  no  place  for  the  archivolts.  Thus  the 
mediaeval  principle  of  intcrpenetration  is  carried  over  into  the 
neo-classic  design. 

It    should    be    observed    that    the    details   of    this   attic  are 


32 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


wrought  in  stucco,  so  that  we  have  with  the  beginning  of  the 
Renaissance  a  revival  of  a  common  ancient  Roman  practice  of 
architectural  deceit.  The  great  order,  however,  is  necessarily 
of  stone,  and  its  general  proportions  are  good,  though  the 
details  are  poor  in  design,  and  coarse  in  execution.^ 

The   facade  of  the  Pazzi  has  been  considered  as  showing 
noteworthy  originality  of  design.     But  there  are  older  buildings 


Fig.  14.  —  Baclia  of  Fiesole. 

in  the  neighbourhood  to  which  it  bears  enough  likeness  to  sug- 
gest its  derivation  from  them.  The  fagade  of  the  Badi'a  of 
Fiesole  (Fig.  14)  is  one  of  these.  By  substituting  a  free-stand- 
ing colonnade  for  the  blind  arcade  of  this  front,  and  breaking 
its  entablature  and  attic  wall  with  an  arch,  we  should  get  the 
leading  features  of  the  Pazzi  front.    Sant'  Jacopo  Soprarno,  with 


^  The  character  of  these  details  will  be  discussed  in  the  chapter  on  the  carved 
ornament  of  the  Renaissance. 


Ill 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


33 


its  attic  surmounting  an  open  portico  having  an  arcade  on  Corin- 
thian columns,  is  also  strongly  suggestive  of  the  same  scheme. 
The  features  that  are  peculiar  to  the  Pazzi,  the  arch  breaking 
the  entablature,  the  barrel  vault  sprung  from  the  order,  and  the 
dome  bisecting  this  vault,  do  little  credit  to  the  architect  as  a 
consistent  designer. 

Two  more  important  examples  of 
church  architecture  in  Florence,  which 
appear  to  be  mainly  by  Brunelleschi, 
are  San  Lorenzo  and  Santo  Spirito. 
What  part  Brunelleschi  had  in  the 
design  of  San  Lorenzo  is  not  perfectly 
clear,!  ]-,y(-  ^he  main  scheme  was  proba- 
bly his,  though  the  work  was  not  com- 
pleted until  after  his  death.  In  the  old 
sacristy  of  this  church,  which  appears 
to  be  the  part  that  was  first  built,  the  in- 
terior design  of  the  Pazzi  chapel  is  re- 
produced with  some  modifications  of 
proportions  and  details,  including  the 
celled  vault  on  a  system  of  ribs,  resting  on 
pendentives.  The  church  itself  exhibits 
a  frank  return  to  primitive  basilican 
forms  and  methods  of  construction, 
though  with  modifications  and  some 
additions.  The'  nave  has  a  flat  wooden 
ceiling,  but  the  aisles  are  covered  with 
domical  vaulting  on  salient  transverse 
ribs,  and  over  the  crossing  is  a  hemi- 
spherical dome  on  pendentives.  In  the 
arcades,  which  are  carried  on  Corinthian 

columns  like  those  of  the  portico  of  the  Pazzi,  the  entablature 
blocks  of  late  Roman  design  are  reproduced  in  the  impost 
(Fig.  15).  The  revival  of  this  meaningless  feature  shows 
again  how  little  impression  the  logic  of  mediaeval  art  had 
made  on  the  Italian  mind,  and  what  lack  of  discrimination  in 
their  borrowings  from  the  antique  the  designers  of  the  Renais- 
sance often  show.  Whatever  features  the  Roman  models  dis- 
played were  looked  upon  as  authoritative,  and  copied  without 

'  Cf.  Vasari,  Opere,  vol.  2,  p.  368  et  seq.,  and  Milancsi's  foot-note,  p.  370. 


Fig.  15.  —  Impost  of  San 
Lorenzo. 


34 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


question  ;  and  the  frequency  with  which  this  superfluous  detail 
was  reproduced  in  the  subsequent  architecture  of  the  Renais- 
sance has  given  it  wide  acceptance  in  more  recent  times.  Not- 
withstanding the  intention  of  the  designer  to  revive  the  ancient 
style,  mediaeval  features  are  conspicuous  in  San  Lorenzo,  and 
^  something   of    the  mediaeval    logic    of 

^^^^'''''^^^^^;:^^  structural   adjustment   occurs   in  some 

L-^c^^'^n^  details.     Not  only  is  the  dome  over  the 

crossing     supported     on     pendentives, 
V^A^-^'/i  J^        which,    in  their    developed    form,    are 

^-'-*,.ll^wSvl!&>  //  A  mediaeval  features  and  thus  foreign  to 
classic  Roman  design,  but  the  piers  sus- 
taining this  dome  are  compound,  and 
consist  of  members  of  different  propor- 
tions adjusted  in  the  organic  mediaeval 
manner.  The  members  which  take  part 
in  the  support  of  the  aisle  arcades  are 
necessarily  short,  while  those  which 
carry  the  great  pendentive  arches  are 
lengthened  to  reach  the  higher  level 
from  which  those  arches  spring.  But 
all  of  these  members  have  the  form  of 
fluted  Corinthian  pilasters  (Fig.  i6). 
Thus  were  classic  members  used  in 
ways  that  are  foreign  to  classic  prin- 
ciples, and  their  proportions  altered 
with  as  much  disregard  for  the  rules 
of  Vitruvius  as  the  mediaeval  builders 
had  shown. 

The  church  of  Santo  Spirito,  built 
after  the  architect's  death,  closely  re- 
sembles San  Lorenzo  in  its  architectural 
character,  though  it  is  larger  in  scale. 
The  entablature  blocks  occur  in  the  arcades  here  also,  but 
instead  of  a  dome  over  the  crossing  as  in  San  Lorenzo,  there 
is  a  circular  celled  vault  on  converging  ribs,  like  the  vault  of 
the  Pazzi  chapel.  The  interior  is  spacious  and  finely  propor- 
tioned, but  it  presents  no  features  that  afford  further  illustra- 
tion of  the  progress  of  neo-classic  design. 

The   retrospective   movement   was   carried   further   by  the 


Fig.  i6.  — Crossing  pier  of 
San  Lorenzo. 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


35 


Florentine  scholar  and  architect  Leon-Batista  Alberti,  who,  says 
Milizia,  is  justly  regarded  as  one  of  the  principal  restorers  of  the 
architecture  of  antiquity.^  His  chief  designs  in  church  architec- 
ture are  found  in  Santa  Maria  Novella  of  Florence,  in  San  Fran- 
cesco of  Rimini,  and  in  Sant'  Andrea  of  Mantua.  The  iirst  two 
of  these  are  mediaeval  structures  in  which  Alberti's  work  is  con- 
fined to  the  remodelling  of  the  exteriors,  but  the  last  was  wholly 
designed  by  him,  though  the  work  was  not  completed  within  his 
lifetime,  and  the  dome  over  the  crossing  is  the  work  of  another 
architect  of  a  later  time. 

How  much  Alberti  did  to  the  facade  of  Santa  Maria  Novella, 
the  part  of  the  building  to  which  his  work  is  confined  is  not 
very  clear.  Vasari  speaks  vaguely  as  if  the  whole  front  were 
by  him,2  but  from  a  foot-note  by  Milanesi  it  would  appear  that 
he  merely  completed  a  part  which  had  been  left  unfinished  by 
an  older  architect,  and  the  work  remaining  by  the  older  archi- 
tect is  said  to  include  all  below  the  first  cornice  except  the 
central  portal,  which  is  attributed  to  Alberti.  Milizia  says^ 
that  although  it  is  common  to  attribute  the  whole  facade  to 
Alberti,  it  has  too  much  Gothic  character  to  be  entirely  by  him, 
and  that  therefore  a  part  of  it  may,  with  more  probability  of  cor- 
rectness, be  assigned  to  Giovanni  Bettini,  an  older  architect ; 
but  he  adds  that  the  central  portal  is  undoubtedly  by  Alberti. 

An  examination  of  the  monument  itself  would  seem  to  show 
that  the  part  below  the  first  entablature,  with  exception  of  the 
great  Corinthian  columns  and  the  central  portal,,  is  mediaeval 
work  (Fig.  17).  The  whole  Corinthian  order,  with  the  angle 
pilasters  and  the  pedestals  on  which  the  order  is  raised,  look 
like  neo-classic  work,  and  are  probably  by  Alberti.  This  order 
is  wholly  different  in  character  from  mediaeval  design,  and  quite 
foreign  to  the  mixture  of  Pisan  Romanesque  and  Italian  Gothic 
features  of  the  distinctly  mediaeval  part  with  which  it  is  asso- 
ciated. The  columns  of  the  order  are,  however,  of  mediaeval 
proportions,  being  eleven  or  twelve  diameters  in  height,  and 
they  are  built  of  small  stones  in  a  common  mediaeval  manner. 
But  these  proportions  were  necessitated  by  the  older  work  to 
which  the  order  had  to  be  adjusted,  and  the  small  masonry  of 
which  they  are  composed  makes  them  harmonize  with  the  older 

^  Op.  cii.,  vol.  I,  p.  2CX).  ^  Op.  cie.,  vol.  2,  p.  541. 

8  Op.  cit.,  vol.  I,  p.  201. 


36 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  REJSTAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


parts.  The  central  portal  has  a  round  arch  on  fluted  Corinthian 
pilasters  framing  in  a  deeply  recessed  rectangular  opening  with 
a  classic  lintel  and  jamb  mouldings.  It  is  noticeable  that  the 
arch  does  not  spring  directly  from  the  capitals  of  the  pilasters, 
but  that  the  entablature  block  is  interposed,  as  in  Brunelleschi's 
arcades  of  San  Lorenzo  and  Santo  Spirito.     Milizia,  speaking 


Fig.  17.  —  Facade  of  Santa  Maria  Novella. 

of  this  feature  in  another  work  by  the  same  architect,  says  :  "  In 
these  arcades  Alberti  observed  a  rule  always  followed  in  the 
good  ancient  times,  but  since  universally  disregarded.  The 
arches  are  not  sprung  from  the  columns,  because  this  would  be 
incorrect,  but  architraves  \_sic\  are  interposed.  It  would  now 
be  ridiculous  to  inculcate  the  importance  of  this  rule,  which  is 
familiar  to  children."  ^     This,  like  other  notions  to  which  the 

1  op.  ciL,  vol.  I,  p.  201. 


Ill  CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE  37 

Renaissance  gave  currency,  is  a  mistake.  In  inserting  the 
entablature  block  at  the  arch  impost  Alberti  did  not  follow  a 
rule  always  observed  in  the  ancient  times.  This  feature  is 
uncommon  in  ancient  Roman  art.  It  was,  as  before  remarked, 
introduced  by  the  late  Roman  architects,  who,  being  accustomed 
to  the  use  of  the  entablature  over  the  column  in  the  trabeate 
system  which  they  had  borrowed  from  the  Greeks,  did  not  see, 
when  they  began  to  spring  arches  from  columns,  that  the 
entablature  had  no  longer  any  reason  for  existence.  The 
radical  nature  of  the  change  wrought  in  architecture  by  the 
introduction  of  the  arch  was  never  grasped  by  the  imperial 
Roman  designers.  First  framing  the  arch  with  an  order,  thus 
uniting  two  contradictory  systems,  they  afterwards,  when,  as  in 
the  basilica  of  Maxentius,  springing  the  arches  of  vaulting  from 
columns,  thought  that  the  rules  required  them  to  crown  these 
columns  with  bits  of  entablature. 

This  facade  appears  to  have  been  originally  designed  in  the 
Pisan  Romanesque  style,  with  a  tall,  shallow  blind  arcade  on 
pilaster-strips  reaching  across  *the  ground  story.  But  the 
Romanesque  character  was  modified  in  some  details,  the  portals 
having  pointed  arches,  pointed  arched  niches  sheltering  tombs 
being  ranged  in  the  intervals  between  the  pilaster-strips.  How 
far  the  upper  part  of  this  facade  had  been  left  incomplete  until 
Alberti  took  it  in  hand  we  have  no  means  of  knowing;  but  no 
mediaeval  features  occur  in  it  as  it  "now  stands,  except  the  cir- 
cular opening  in  the  central  compartment.  Upon  this  front, 
then,  Alberti  appears  to  have  ingrafted  the  great  Corinthian 
order,  placing  a  wide  pilaster  paired  with  a  column  on  each 
angle,  breaking  the  entablature  into  ressauts  to  cover  the 
columns,  which  have  nothing  else  to  support,  and  replacing  the 
central  portal  with  the  existing  one  in  the  revived  classic  style. 
The  preservation  of  the  greater  part  of  the  mediaeval  work  in 
the  ground  story  made  it  impossible  to  get  in  more  than  the  four 
columns  in  the  great  order,  and  these  are  necessarily  spaced  in 
an  unclassic  way,  with  a  narrow  interval  in  the  middle  and  very 
wide  ones  on  either  side.  To  the  upper  compartment  the 
architect  has  given  an  order  of  pilasters  surmounted  by  a  classic 
pediment,  and  flanked  by  screen  walls  over  the  aisle  compart- 
ments in  the  form  of  gigantic  reversed  consoles,  apparently  the 
first  of   these  features   which    became    common    thereafter    in 


38  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

Renaissance  fronts.  The  pilasters  of  this  order  are  again  four 
in  number,  and  are  set  in  pairs  on  either  side  of  the  circular 
opening,  the  width  of  this  opening  making  it  impossible  to 
space  them  otherwise.  We  thus  have  in  the  clerestory  com- 
partment of  this  fagade  a  forced  arrangement  of  pilasters,  which 
may  have  led  to  that  alternation  of  wide  and  narrow  intervals 
that  became  very  common  in  the  subsequent  architecture  of  the 
Renaissance.  The  attic  over  the  ground  story,  which  extends 
across  the  entire  front  and  answers  to  nothing  in  the  interior  of 
the  building,  is  presumably  also  by  Alberti. 

The  front  of  Santa  Maria  Novella  is  notable  as  the  first 
mediaeval  one  which  was  worked  over  by  a  Renaissance  archi- 
tect, and  as  a  whole,  notwithstanding  that  it  is  a  patchwork  of 
incongruous  elements,  it  exhibits  a  remarkable  unity  of  effect. 
The  merit  of  Alberti's  work  here  consists  in  its  quietness.  The 
applied  orders  are  in  low  relief,  their  details  are  unobtrusive, 
and  the  mellowing  effect  of  age  on  the  beautiful  marble  incrust- 
ing  has  fused  the  whole  front  into  an  exquisite  colour  harmony 
that  is  almost  unmatched  elsewhere. 

Very  different  is  the  west  front  of  San  Francesco  of  Rimini, 
in  which  Alberti  has  introduced  a  Roman  composition  without 
any  admixture  of  mediaeval  elements.  It  is  substantially  a 
reproduction  of  the  arch  of  Septimius  Severus.  The  details  are 
in  higher  relief  here  in  conformity  with  the  ancient  model,  and 
the  ressauts  of  the  entablature  become  correspondingly  more 
salient.  A  ressaut  of  this  kind  is  another  feature  of  Roman 
art  which  has  no  justification  on  structural  grounds,  and  to 
which  there  is  nothing  analogous  in  any  reasonable  style  of 
architecture.  To  set  a  useless  column  in  advance  of  an  entab- 
lature and  then  make  a  ressaut  to  cover  it,  is  irrational. 

Alberti's  capital  work  in  church  architecture  is  Sant'  Andrea 
of  Mantua,  begun  in  1472,  the  year  of  the  architect's  death,  in 
which  he  made  a  frank  return  to  Roman  models  in  the  structural 
forms  of  the  whole  edifice,  as  well  as  in  the  ornamental  details 
—  a  thing  that  was  rarely  done  by  the  architects  of  the  Renais- 
sance. The  plan  (Fig.  18)  is,  however,  cruciform,  and  the  dome 
over  the  crossing  is  supported  in  the  Byzantine  manner  on  pen- 
den  tives.  The  nave  (Plate  II)  has  a  barrel  vault  on  massive  square 
piers  connected  by  arches,  the  intervals  between  the  piers  form- 
ing side  chapels,  and  the  lower  part  of  each  pier  having  a  small 


CO 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


39 


square  chamber  within  it,  so  that  it  does  not  look  as  massive  on 
the  plan  as  it  does  in  elevation.  The  east  end  has  the  strictly 
Roman  form  of  a  semicircular  apse  with  a  half-dome  vault. 
The  details  of  the  interior  consist  of  a  single  order  of  pilasters, 
on  high  pedestals,  set  on  the  angles  of  the  piers,  and  of  rich 
Roman  coffering  on  the  surfaces  of  the  vaulting.  The  piers 
closely  resemble  those  of 
the  so-called  arch  of  the 
Silversmiths  in  Rome, 
which  it  is  not  unlikely 
that  Alberti  had  in  mind 
in  designing  them,  inas- 
much as  he  was  a  devoted 
student  of  Roman  archi- 
tectural antiquities.  This 
interior  is,  I  think,  one  of 
the  very  finest  that  the 
Renaissance  produced. 
The  justness  of  its  propor- 
tions, the  simplicity  of  the 
structural  scheme,  and  the 
quietness  of  the  orna- 
mental details  are  all  ad- 
mirable. With  the  given 
elements  it  is  hard  to  see 
how  a  better  composition 
could  be  made ;  but  the 
incongruity  between  the 
structural  and  ornamental 
systems,  the  entirely  super- 
ficial use  of  the  order,  and 
its   unfitness  as  ornament 

where  it  has  no  structural  meaning,  are  fundamental  defects 
of  this  as  of  most  other  Renaissance  designs.  The  scheme 
of  St.  Andrea  foreshadows  that  of  St.  Peter's,  and  was  un- 
doubtedly in  the  mind  of  Bramante  when  he  was  preparing  his 
colossal  project  for  Pope  Julius  II. 

The  west  front  of  this  church  (Fig.  19)  is  again  an  adapta- 
tion of  a  Roman  triumphal  arch  design.  It  is,  in  fact,  as  the 
plan  (Fig.  18)  shows,  a  great  porch  set  against  the  true  front, 


Fig.  18.  —  Sant'  Andrea,  Mantua. 


40 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


and  has  no  correspondence  in  its  parts  with  those  of  the  building 
itself.  In  outline  it  is  an  unbroken  rectangle  crowned  with  a 
pediment.  A  very  shallow  order  of  Corinthian  pilasters  divides 
it  into  a  wide  central  bay  and  two  narrow  ones.  A  great  arch 
over  a  smaller  order  opens  into  a  barrel-vaulted  recess,  on  the 
three  sides  of  which  the  entablature  is  returned.  A  rectangular 
portal,  with  square  jambs  and  a  cornice,  opens  into  the  nave,  and 


Fig.  19.  —  Facade  of  Sant'  Andrea,  Mantua. 


an  arch  reaching  to  the  entablature  opens  into  the  lateral  com- 
partment on  each  side,  and  each  of  these  compartments  has  a 
barrel  vault  with  its  axis  perpendicular  to  that  of  the  great  cen- 
tral one.  The  entablature  of  the  small  order  is  carried  across 
the  front  of  each  lateral  bay,  dividing  it  into  two  stages,  and  the 
great  order  rises  through  it,  embracing  both  stages,  and  forming 
an  early  instance  of  the  so-called  colossal  order  that  became 
common  in  the  later  Renaissance.     The  great  order  is  raised  on 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


41 


pedestals,  and  both  pedestals  and  pilasters  of  this  order  are 
panelled,  while  the  small  order  rests  directly  on  the  pavement 
and  its  pilasters  are  fluted.  It  is  noticeable  that  the  design  of 
the  central  arch  is  almost  exactly  like  that  of  the  central  portal 
of  Santa  Maria  Novella  in  Florence,  the  smaller  entablature 
being  broken  into  shallow  ressauts  over  the  pilasters,  giving  the 
same  character  to  the  imposts.     The  front  as  a  whole  has  the 


Fig.  20.  —  Arch  of  Septimius  Severus, 


quiet  and  refined  character   that  distinguishes  this   architect's 
work  in  general. 

That  Alberti  derived  all  of  these  fagades,  and  especially  that 
of  St.  Andrea,  from  the  Roman  triumphal  arch  scheme  a  direct 
comparison  will  show ;  and  the  arch  of  Septimius  Severus  (Fig. 
20)  may,  I  think,  be  taken  as  the  model  that  he  had  chiefly  in 
mind.     In   Santa    Maria  Novella   the  mediaeval  scheme  upon 


42  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

which  he  had  to  fit  his  work  prevented  such  a  disposition  of  the 
columns,  and  such  general  proportions  as  this  model  exhibits.  He 
was  obliged  to  make  the  lateral  intercolumniations  much  wider 
than  the  central  one,  and  to  make  the  whole  rectangle  of  the  com- 
position more  oblong  than  that  of  the  ancient  monument ;  but 
in  most  other  points  he  has  followed  the  arch  of  Septimius 
Severus  closely.  As  in  the  Roman  design  the  entablature 
crowns  the  wall  instead  of  the  order,  so  that  ressauts  have  to  be 
formed  to  cover  the  columns.  The  insertion  of  the  angle  pilaster 
is  a  departure  from  the  Roman  scheme,  and  the  placing  of  the 
stumpy  pilaster  of  the  attic  over  the  great  pilaster,  instead  of  on 
the  column,  is  another  point  of  difference.  But  the  general 
scheme  of  the  ground  story  and  attic  will  be  seen  to  resemble 
that  of  the  Roman  design  about  as  closely  as  the  mediaeval  edi- 
fice on  which  it  is  ingrafted  would  allow.  In  San  Francesco  at 
Rimini  the  architect  had  a  freer  hand,  and  the  order  is  treated 
in  closer  conformity  with  the  ancient  model  as  to  the  spacing 
of  the  columns  and  other  details.  The  angles  are  treated  pre- 
cisely as  they  are  in  the  arch  of  Septimius  Severus,  the  pilasters 
being  omitted,  and  the  entablature  at  each  end  extending  beyond 
the  ressaut.  The  attic  is  omitted  here,  and  the  unfinished  upper 
part  of  the  facade  is  necessarily  of  different  design. 

In  St.  Andrea  at  Mantua  the  use  of  pilasters  instead  of 
columns,  and  the  absence  of  ressauts  in  the  great  order,  as 
well  as  the  substitution  of  a  pediment  for  the  attic,  make  a 
great  difference  in  the  general  character  of  the  design ;  and 
yet  the  triumphal  arch  idea  is  even  more  strongly  marked  in 
this  case,  because  it  is  not  confined  to  the  mere  facade  but 
extends  to  the  form  of  the  whole  porch.  The  great  barrel- 
vaulted  recess  is  an  exact  reproduction  of  the  central  passage- 
way of  the  Roman  arch,  and  so  are  the  lesser  arches  which 
open  out  of  this  recess  on  either  side. 

The  triumphal  arch  idea  applied  to  church  fronts  appears 
to  be  peculiar  to  Alberti.  Most  other  architects  among  his 
contemporaries  and  immediate  successors  limit  themselves  to 
an  application  of  the  orders  variously  proportioned  and  dis- 
posed. In  some  cases  the  mediseval  scheme  of  buttresses  divid- 
ing the  front  into  bays  is  retained,  and  this  scheme  is  enriched 
with  pilasters,  or  columns,  and  mouldings  of  classic  profiling, 
as  in  the  facade  of   the  Duomo  of   Pienza  by  the  Florentine 


Ill  CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE  43 

architect  Rossellino.  In  the  later  Renaissance  facades,  as  we 
shall  see,  there  is  frequently  no  organic  division  of  the  whole 
front  into  bays  by  continuous  members  embracing  its  whole 
height,  but  superimposed  pilasters  and  entablatures  are  vari- 
ously disposed  upon  the  surface  without  any  suggestion,  in 
the  composition  as  a  whole,  of  the  triumphal  arch  idea  (as  in 
Vignola's  fronts.  Figs.  49  and  50).  But  in  the  characteristic 
Palladian  scheme  an  organic  division  is  formed  by  a  great  order 
of  columns  reaching  to  the  top  of  the  nave  compartment,  and 
overlapping  a  smaller  order  of  pilasters  extending  across  the 
whole  front  as  in  Figure  54. 

The  foregoing  examples  are  enough  to  illustrate  the  char- 
acter of  Florentine  church  architecture,  and  that  which  was 
wrought  elsewhere  under  Florentine  influence,  in  the  fifteenth 
century.  These  examples  show  us  that  the  designers,  while 
ostensibly  striving  to  revive  the  antique  forms,  were  in  reality 
working  more  or  less  unconsciously  on  a  foundation  of  medi- 
aeval ideas  from  which  they  could  not  free  themselves.  The 
inconsistencies  of  their  work  are  largely  due  to  the  irreconcila- 
ble nature  of  the  elements  which  they  sought  to  unite,  not  ap- 
preciating the  logic  of  mediaeval  art  on  the  one  hand,  nor  the 
true  principles  of  the  best  art  of  antiquity  on  the  other.  The 
classic  orders  were  entirely  unsuited  to  the  buildings  to  which 
they  affixed  them.  They  properly  belong  to  a  very  different 
type  of  architecture  which  had  been  developed  by  the  Greeks 
in  ancient  times,  and  the  Greeks  alone  have  used  them  with 
propriety.  The  Romans  misapplied  and  deformed  them,  and 
the  Italians  of  the  Renaissance  now  surpassed  the  Romans  in 
their  misapplication  and  distortion.  Many  further  illustrations 
of  this  will  appear  as  we  go  on. 

Early  in  the  sixteenth  century  this  architecture  began  to 
assume  another  phase  in  which  the  mediaeval  elements  became 
less  conspicuous,  though  they  were  not  eliminated,  and  the 
imperial  Roman  features  were  more  rigorously  reproduced,  yet 
they  were  never  used  with  strict  conformity  to  ancient  models. 
This  phase  of  the  art  was  inaugurated  by  the  architect  Bra- 
mante  after  his  settlement  in  Rome.  We  shall  consider  the 
Roman  work  of  Bramante,  in  the  following  chapter. 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE    DOME    OF    ST.    PETER's 

When  in  the  year  1503  Pope  Julius  II  came  to  the  papal 
chair,  the  architect  Bramante  had  recently  settled  in  Rome. 
Born  in  Urbino,  he  had  spent  his  early  manhood  in  the  North 
of  Italy,  where  he  had  come  under  the  influence  of  the  Floren- 
tine architect  Alberti  at  Mantua,  and  of  the  early  Renaissance 
masters  at  Milan  and  elsewhere.  Under  these  influences  he 
had  acquired  a  style  that  was  peculiar  to  the  North  at  that 
time.  But  since  coming  to  Rome  he  had  begun  to  form  a  new 
manner  under  the  more  direct  influence  of  the  Roman  antique,^ 
and  he  soon  developed  a  style  in  which  the  ancient  Roman 
forms  were  reproduced  with  stricter  conformity  to  the  ancient 
usage,  and  with  smaller  admixture  of  mediaeval  features  than 
had  before  prevailed. 

An  early  work  in  Rome  in  which  he  exhibits  this  more  rigor- 
ous classic  tendency  is  the  small  building  known  as  the  Tem- 
pietto  in  the  cloister  of  San  Pietro  in  Montorio.  It  consists 
of  a  circular  cella  with  shallow  pilasters,  surrounded  by  a  colon- 
nade of  the  Roman  Doric  order,  and  surmounted  by  a  hemi- 
spherical dome  on  a  high  drum.  It  is  thus  in  form  like  a  Roman 
temple  of  Vesta  with  its  dome  raised  out  of  the  abutting  drum 
and  set  upon  its  top  without  abutment.  A  glance  at  Figures  21 
and  22,  a  part  section  and  part  elevation  of  the  temple  of  Vesta 
at  Tivoli,  and  an  elevation  of  the  Tempietto,  respectively,^  will 
show  how  great  a  change  Bramante  made  in  the  adjustment  of 
the  vault  to  the  supporting  drum,  while  it  will  show  also  the 
essential  hkeness  in  other  points  between  the  two  monuments. 
In  Figure  21  it  will  be  seen  that  the  vault  is  well  abutted 
by  the  roof  of  the  portico,  and  by  stepped  rings  of  masonry 

^  Vasari,  op.  cil.,  vol.  4,  p.  152,  and  Milizia,  vol.  i,  p.  214. 

2  Figures  21  and  22  are  taken  from  Serlio,  Z?'  Architettura,  book  3,  Venice, 
1560,  pp.  25  and  40. 

44 


CHAP.  IV 


THE  DOME  OF  ST.   PETER'S 


45 


over  the  haunch,  while  in  Figure  22  the  drum  is  raised  high 
above  the  encircling  portico,  and  the  vault  is  sprung  from  its 
top,  and  has  no  abutting  rings.  The  architect  appears  to  have 
realized  that  such  a  scheme  would  be  unsafe  on  a  large  scale, 
for  in  the  one  which  he  prepared  for  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's  he 
took  care,  as  we  shall  see,  to^  provide  strong  abutment. 


Fic.  21.  —  Temple  of  Vesta,  Tivoli,  from  Serlio. 

The  Tempietto  is  but  a  modified  copy  of  an  ancient  model, 
and  in  no  true  sense  an  original  design.  The  changes  wrought 
by  the  copyist  are  not  of  a  creative  kind  consistent  with  true 
principles  of  building.  The  pilasters,  and  the  balustrade  with 
which  the  order  of  the  portico  is  crowned,  are  superfluous,  and 
the  work  as  a  whole  shows  little  of  Bramante's  real  ability  as  an 
architect.     Such  merit  as  it  has  is  primarily  due  to  the  ancient 


46 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


model  which  he  would  have  done  better  to  have  reproduced 
more  exactly. 


r-' 


¥\C  22. —  San  Pietro  in  Montorio,  from  Serlio. 


But  Bramante  manifested  his  real  powers  in  his  project  for 
the  great  church  of  St.  Peter,  his  capital  work,  which,  however, 
was  never  carried  to  completion.  It  is  well  known  how  Pope 
Julius  II  had  conceived  the  idea  of  erecting  a  vast  tomb  for 
himself,  and  had    employed    Michael   Angelo  to    prepare    the 


IV  THE  DOME  OE  ST.    PETER'S  47 

design.  We  are  told  by  Vasari  ^  that  the  project  submitted 
by  this  great  artist  so  pleased  the  Pope  that  he  determined  to 
rebuild  the  church  of  St.  Peter  in  order  to  make  it  more  worthy 
to  enshrine  so  magnificent  a  monument.  Under  Pope  Nicho- 
las V,  half  a  century  before,  the  grand  old  basilica,  that  had 
stood  since  the  time  of  Constantine,  had  been  partially  demol- 
ished, and  a  new  edifice  on  a  larger  scale  begun  by  the  Floren- 
tine architect,  Rossellino.  This  work  had  not  progressed  very 
far  when  it  was  suspended  on  the  death  of  this  Pope,  and 
operations  had  not  been  resumed  until  now,  when  Pope  Julius 
resolved  to  demolish  Rossellino's  beginning  along  with  what 
remained  of  the  old  structure,  and  to  make  a  fresh  start  with 
a  still  grander  scheme,  which  was  prepared  by  Bramante,  who 
began  the  new  work  in  the  year  1 506. 

There  is  much  uncertainty  as  to  the  exact  nature  of  Bra- 
mante's  design  for  the  building  as  a  whole.  No  authentic 
drawings  embodying  the  definitive  project  are  known  to  exist, 
and  in  the  monument  itself  Bramante  did  not  go  far  enough  to 
show  his  whole  intention.  Even  what  he  actually  did  cannot 
be  wholly  made  out  with  clearness,  because  so  many  other 
hands  were  employed  after  his  death.  The  exact  form  of  his 
plan  is  uncertain,  though  there  appears  little  question  that  it 
was  to  be  in  the  form  of  the  Greek  cross  with  towers  set  in  the 
external  angles,  and  it  is  certain  that  a  vast  dome  was  to  rise 
over  the  crossing.^  The  work,  though  considerably  advanced, 
was  not  nearly  completed  when,  in  the  year  15 14,  the  master 
died.  He  appears  to  have  built  the  great  piers  for  the  support 
of  the  dome,  with  their  connecting  arches  and  pendentives,  but 
not  to  have  begun  the  dome  itself. 

The  scheme  was  to  be  a  colossal  one,  and  the  dome  was  to 


1  op.  cit.,  vol.  7,  p.  163. 

2  Serlio,  the  architect  (a  younger  contemporary  of  Bramante),  op.  cit.,  p.  T,'i„  tells 
us  that  Bramante,  at  his  death,  left  no  perfect  model  of  the  whole  edifice,  and  that 
several  ingenious  persons  endeavoured  to  carry  out  the  design,  among  whom  were 
Raphael  and  Peruzzi,  whose  plans  he  reproduces.  That  ascribed  to  Raphael  has  a 
long  nave,  while  that  said  to  be  by  Peruzzi  has  the  form  of  the  Greek  cross  with 
round  apses  and  a  square  tower  in  each  external  angle.  The  whole  question  of 
Bramante's  scheme,  and  of  the  successive  transformations  to  which  the  design  for  the 
edifice  was  subjected  before  its  final  completion,  is  fully  discussed  in  the  work  of 
Baron  H.  von  GeymUUer,  Die  urspriinglichen  Entwiirf  fiir  Sanct  Peter  in  Rom, 
Wein  and  Paris,  1875-1880. 


48  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

be  its  main  feature.     We  may  presume  that   Bramante  natu- 
rally shared  the  universal  feeling  of  admiration  for  Brunelleschi's 


Fig.  23.  —  Bramante's  dome  for  St.  Peter's,  from  Serlio, 

dome,  and  that  he  wished  to  rival  its  imposing  character.  But 
his  ardent  and  intelligent  study  of  the  monuments  of  Roman 
antiquity  had  given  him  a  better  appreciation  of  their  superior 


IV  THE  DOME  OF  ST.   PETER'S  49 

Structural  merits,  and  in  his  project  for  the  great  dome  he  had 
sought  to  adhere  more  closely  than  Brunelleschi  had  done  to 
the  ancient  principles  and  ancient  forms. 

In  seeking  guidance  from  the  antique  two  monuments  in 
particular  appear  to  have  appealed  to  him  as  offering  appropri- 
ate suggestions,  the  Pantheon  and  the  Basilica  of  Maxentius, 
then  called  the  Temple  of  Peace.  The  first  of  these  monuments 
gave  the  model  for  a  mighty  hemispherical  vault  securely  sus- 
pended over  a  vast  area,  while  the  second  offered  an  example 
of  a  stupendous  system  of  piers  and  arches.  In  maturing  his 
great  scheme  with  these  models  before  him,  he  conceived  the 
idea  of  uniting  their  respective  sublimities,  and  is  said  to  have 
boasted  that  he  would  set  the  Pantheon  upon  the  arches  of  the 
Temple  of  Peace.  While  it  is  probable  that  the  majestic  eleva- 
tion of  the  dome  of  Florence  haunted  his  imagination,  and  led 
him  to  feel  that  he  must  lift  his  dome  high,  he  wished,  at  the 
same  time,  to  give  the  design  a  more  classic  character,  and  a 
sounder  structural  form.  In  striving  to  accomplish  this  double 
purpose  Bramante  produced  a  scheme  for  an  elevated  dome  of 
almost  thoroughly  Roman  character,  and  at  the  same  time  of 
imposing  external  effect.  The  architect  Serlio  gives  an  illus- 
tration ^  (Fig.  23)  of  this  project  which  is  highly  instructive.^ 
A  comparison  of  it  with  the  scheme  of  the  Pantheon  shows  a 
close  likeness  in  essential  forms  and  adjustments.  The  points 
of  difference  are  mainly  such  as  Bramante's  desire  to  make  his 
dome  externally  conspicuous  would  require.  In  the  Pantheon 
(Fig.  24)  the  dome  springs  from  within  the  massive  drum  at 
a  level  far  below  the  external  cornice,  so  that  the  wall 
above  the  springing  forms  a  solid  and  powerful  abutment, 
reaching  almost  to  the  haunch  of  the  vault.  Above  this  a 
stepped  mass  of  masonry,  diminishing  in  thickness  as  it  rises, 
is  carried  well  over  the  haunch,  effectively  overcoming  any  ten- 
dency to  yield  to  the  force  of  thrust.  A  Corinthian  order,  sur- 
mounted by  an  attic,  is  carried  around  the  wall  of  the  interior,^ 
while  the  wall  on  the  outside  is  plain. 

1  Op.  cit.,  bk.  3,  p.  37. 

2  Serlio  does  not  state  on  what  authority  this  illustration  is  based,  but  there 
appears  no  reason  to  question  its  correctness.  Its  authenticity  is  discussed  by  Baron 
von  Geymiiller  (0/.  cit.,  p.  240  et  seq^,  who  accepts  it  as  genuine. 

^  The  alterations  that  have  been  made  at  different  times  since  the  original  com- 
E 


50 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


In  Bramante's  project  every  essential  feature  of  this  ancient 
monument  is  reproduced,  but  with  modifications  which  give  a 
different  aspect  to  the  design  as  a  whole,  but  do  not  constitute 
any  such  radical  departure  from  the  principles  embodied  in  the 
Pantheon  as  those  wrought  by  Brunelleschi  in  adapting  the 
scheme  of  the  Baptistery  to  that  of  the  dome  of  the  cathedral  of 
Florence.      In   order  to  secure  greater  elevation  for  external 


Fig.  24.  —  The  Pantheon. 


effect,  the  architect  has  raised  the  springing  level  of  the  dome 
considerably,  though  he  has  still  kept  it  below  the  top  of 
the  drum.  The  drum  itself  is  of  great  thickness,  and  forms  a 
strong  continuous  abutment  at  the  springing,  and  the  haunch 
of  the  vault  is  loaded  with  steps  of  masonry  as  in  the  Pantheon, 
though  not  quite  so  heavily.  The  lower  half  of  the  drum  is 
a  solid  wall  resting  on  the  pendentives,  while  the  upper  part, 
which  is  less  than  half  as  thick  (Fig.  25),  is  pierced  with  eight 

pletion  of  this  interior  are  of  no  concern  here.  The  arrangement  was  practically  the 
same  in  Bramante's  time  as  it  is  now. 


IV 


THE  DOME   OF  ST.    PETER'S 


51 


wide  openings,  and  its  inner  and  outer  faces  are  each  adorned 
with  an  order  of  pilasters  alternating  with  free-standing 
columns  in  the  intervals.  The  upper  wall  stands  on  the  inner 
circumference  of  the  massive  lower  ring,  while  an  encircling 
order  of  Corinthian  columns  is  ranged  on  its  outer  circumfer- 


FlG.  25.  —  Plan  of  Bramante's  dome,  from  Serlio. 


ence,  and  gives  an  effect  of  lightness  and  elegance  to  the 
exterior,  which,  together  with  the  lantern  at  the  crown  of  the 
dome,  goes  far  to  disguise  the  real  likeness  of  the  whole  to 
the  Pantheon  scheme. 

In  these  changes  and  additions  Bramante  was  governed  by 
a  clear  understanding  of  the  exigencies  of  his  project.  He  was 
obliged  to  raise  the  internal  order  from  the  place  on  the  ground 


52  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  REATA/SSANCE  chap. 

level  which  it  occupies  in  the  Pantheon,  to  the  upper  part  of 
the  drum,  in  order  to  provide  a  solid  foundation  resting  on  the 
pendentives ;  and  this  compelled  him  to  eliminate  the  attic 
story  of  the  Pantheon  scheme.  The  most  radical  change  was 
that  of  substituting  the  open  colonnade  for  the  solid  wall  on  the 
outside  of  the  drum.  It  is  doubtful,  I  think,  whether  the  drum 
thus  lightened  would  have  had  enough  strength  to  withstand 
the  enormous  thrusts  of  such  a  dome. 

Like  the  dome  of  the  Pantheon,  Bramante's  dome  was  to  be 
hemispherical  and  to  have  an  opening  at  its  crown.  Over  this 
he  was  to  set  the  lantern  which  in  outline  recalls  that  of  Bru- 
nelleschi,  though  it  is  of  lower  proportions,  in  keeping  with  the 
less  elevated  form  of  his  dome,  and  has  a  small  hemispherical 
dome  instead  of  a  conical  roof.  The  shape  of  the  lantern 
accords  well  with  the  composition  as  a  whole,  and  contributes 
much  to  the  aspiring  expression  which  was  now  demanded, 
without  wholly  contradicting  the  classical  spirit  that  the  archi- 
tect was  striving  to  maintain. 

The  structural  merit  of  this  scheme  Hes  in  what  it  has 
derived  from  the  forms  and  adjustments  of  the  Pantheon.  Its 
weakness  consists  in  the  increased  elevation,  lifting  the  dome 
away  from  its  abutment  to  such  an  extent  that  it  may  be  ques- 
tioned whether  it  could  have  been  made  safe  without  chains. 
The  thrusts  of  a  hemispherical  dome  are  vastly  more  powerful 
than  those  of  a  vault  of  pointed  outline,  like  the  dome  of  Flor- 
ence, but  if  properly  abutted,  as  in  the  Pantheon,^  it  is  perfectly 
safe,  and  makes  a  better  ceiling  than  a  pointed  vault.  In  reduc- 
ing the  efficiency  of  his  abutment  by  raising  the  springing  of 
the  dome  so  high,  the  architect  ought  to  have  diminished  the 
force  of    its  thrust  in   a  corresponding  degree  by  giving  it  a 

1  Some  writers  have  supposed  (cf.  Middleton,  Ancient  Rome,  Edinburgh,  1885, 
pp.  338-339)  that  the  dome  of  the  Pantheon  is  entirely  of  concrete,  and  without 
thrusts.  We  have  no  means  of  kncwing  its  exact  internal  character,  but  there  is  rea- 
son to  believe  that  it  has  some  sort  of  an  embedded  skeleton  of  ribs  and  arches,  with 
concrete  filling  the  intervals.  But  if  it  were  wholly  of  concrete,  as  Middleton  affirms, 
it  would  not  be  safe  without  abutment ;  for,  even  supposing  that  a  concrete  vault 
may  be  entirely  free  from  thrust  in  a  state  of  integrity,  there  is  always  a  chance  of 
ruptures  arising  from  unequal  settlement,  which  might  at  once  create  powerful 
thrusts.  However  this  may  be,  the  fact  is  that  the  builders  of  the  Pantheon  took 
care  to  fortify  it  with  enormous  abutment,  which  would  seem  to  show  that  they  did 
not  consider  it  free  from  thrust. 


IV  THE  DOME   OF  ST.   PETER'S  53 

pointed  form.  This  would  have  made  it  more  safe,  but  it 
would  have  been  inconsistent  with  the  classic  Roman  models  to 
which  he  was  striving  to  conform. 

As  for  Bramante's  intended  architectural  treatment  of  the 
rest  of  the  building  we  have,  as  before  remarked,  no  precise 
information.  It  appears,  however,  most  probable  that  he  meant 
to  cover  the  arms  of  the  cross  with  barrel  vaulting  on  massive 
square  piers  and  arches,  with  a  single  order  of  pilasters  such  as 
Alberti  had  used  in  St.  Andrea  at  Mantua,  and  such  as  Michael 
Angelo  actually  employed,  though  in  a  way  peculiar  to  himself, 
and  probably  unlike  that  in  which  Bramante  would  have  done 
it.  For  Bramante  would,  I  think,  have  followed  Alberti's  exam- 
ple in  raising  the  order  on  pedestals  —  the  great  scale  of  St. 
Peter's  especially  calling  for  such  treatment.  Bramante  would 
have  realized  that  a  single  order  large  enough  to  rest  directly 
on  the  pavement  and  allow  the  entablature  to  pass  over  the 
crowns  of  the  arches  of  the  great  arcades,  would  dwarf  the 
apparent  scale  of  the  whole  interior,  as  Michael  Angelo's  order 
actually  does.  But  whatever  his  intention  was  as  to  these 
details,  Bramante  died  before  they  could  be  carried  out,  and  we 
are  left  in  the  dark  as  to  what  the  church  as  a  whole  would  have 
been  had  he  lived  to  complete  it. 

To  the  work  of  his  numerous  successors  prior  to  the  appoint- 
ment of  Michael  Angelo,  we  need  give  no  attention  because 
their  labours  did  not  materially  affect  the  final  result.  Their 
work  was  largely  on  paper  only,  and  the  building  as  it  now 
exists  is  substantially  Michael  Angelo's  design,  based  on  that  of 
Bramante,  but  with  extensive,  and  damaging,  additions  by  sub- 
sequent architects. 

Michael  Angelo  at  the  time  of  his  appointment  as  architect, 
in  the  year  1546,  was  seventy-two  years  of  age.  He  professed 
great  respect  for  the  original  scheme  of  Bramante,  yet  he  radi- 
cally changed  the  form  and  adjustment  of  its  main  feature,  the 
dome.  In  conformity  with  Bramante's  project,  he  made  the  drum 
massive  at  the  base  and  thinner  above,  but  in  place  of  Bramante's 
external  colonnade  surmounted  by  a  solid  ring  of  masonry,  form- 
ing a  continuous  abutment  at  the  springing  of  the  vault,  he  sub- 
stituted a  series  of  sixteen  isolated  buttresses,  and  raised  the 
dome  so  high  above  them  that  they  do  not  meet  its  thrusts  at 
all.     The  drum  is  carried  up  above  the  buttresses  so  as  to  form 


54 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


an  attic  over  the  order  with  which  the  buttresses  are  orna- 
mented, and  from  the  top  of  this  attic  the  dome  is  sprung. 
The  stepped  circles  of  abutting  masonry  at  the  haunch  are 
omitted,  and  instead  of  one  solid  vault  shell,  such  as  Bramante 
intended,  Michael  Angelo's  project  provided  for  a  variation  of 


Fig.  26. — The  model. 


Brunelleschi's  double  vault,  and  was  to  include  (as  the  model, 
Fig.  26,  shows)  three  separate  shells.^  The  inner  shell  was  to 
be  hemispherical  (Michael  Angelo  thus  showing  that  he  appre- 
ciated the  superior  character  of  the  dome  of  the  Pantheon  and 

^  Michael  Angelo's  model,  on  a  large  scale  and  finished  in  every  detail,  is  pre- 
served in  an  apartment  of  St.  Peter's. 


IV  THE  DOME  OF  ST.   PETER'S  55 

that  of  Bramante's  scheme  to  the  dome  of  Brunelleschi  as  to 
internal  effect),  while  the  other  two  were  to  be  pointed,  with 
diverging  surfaces.  Following  Brunelleschi,  he  introduced  a 
system  of  enormous  ribs  rising  over  the  buttresses  of  the  drum, 
and  converging  on  the  opening  at  the  crown  of  the  vault. 
These  ribs  unite  the  outermost  two  shells,  extending  through 
the  thickness  of  both,  and  support  the  lantern. 

Of  this  hazardous  scheme  only  the  drum  was  completed 
when  Michael  Angelo  died.  But  the  existing  dome,  which  was 
carried  out  by  his  immediate  successors,  is  substantially  his 
design,  though  the  innermost  shell  of  the  model  was  omitted  in 
execution,  and  the  vault  was  thus  made  double  instead  of  three- 
fold (Fig.  30).  This  dome  does  not,  however,  divide  into  two 
shells  from  near  the  springing,  but  is  carried  up  in  one  solid 
mass  almost  to  the  level  of  the  haunch.  Michael  Angelo  may 
have  thought  that  this  would  strengthen  it,  but  the  soHd  part 
has  not  a  form  capable  of  much  resistance  to  thrust,  and  the 
isolated  buttresses  are  located  so  far  below  the  springing  that 
they  contribute  practically  nothing  to  the  strength  of  the  system, 
as  already  remarked,  and  as  we  shall  presently  see. 

Although  this  great  dome  has  been  almost  universally  lauded, 
it  is  entirely  indefensible  from  the  point  of  view  of  sound  prin- 
ciples of  construction.  The  work  shows  that  Michael  Angelo 
was  not  imbued,  as  Bramante  had  been,  with  a  sense  of  the 
essential  conditions  of  stability  in  dome  building  as  exemplified 
in  the  works  of  Roman  antiquity.  He  had  conceived  an  ardent 
admiration  for  the  dome  of  Florence,  and  in  emulation  of  it  he 
changed  the  external  outline  from  the  hemispherical  to  the 
pointed  form,  and,  lifting  it  out  of  the  buttressing  drum,  set  it 
on  the  top.^ 

This  vast  dome  is  an  imposing  object,  but  it  is  nevertheless 
a  monument  of  structural  error.  Not  only  does  its  form  and 
construction  render  it  much  less  secure  than  Brunelleschi's 
dome,  but  its  supporting  drum  is  entirely  unsuited  to  its  function, 

1  Michael  Angelo's  remark,  quoted  by  Fontana  (Tempio  Vaticano,  vol.  2,  p.  315) '. 
"  Imitando  1'  antico  del  Pantheon,  e  la  moderna  di  Santa  Maria  del  Fiore,  corresse 
i  difetti  dell'  uno,  e  dell'  altro,"  shows  that  he  regarded  as  a  defect  the  lowness 
of  the  Pantheon  dome,  which  in  point  of  construction  is  its  capital  merit,  and  that 
what  he  proposed  to  correct  in  the  dome  of  Florence  was  its  octagonal  form,  which 
is  essential  to  its  peculiar  structural  system. 


56 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


save  as  to  its  strength  to  bear  the  mere  crushing  weight  of  the 
vault.  In  replacing  the  continuous  colonnade,  with  its  abutting 
load,  of  Bramante's  drum  by  the  isolated  buttresses,  Michael 
Angelo  ignored  the  true  principle  of  resistance  to  the  continu- 
ous thrusts  of  a  dome.  It  has  been  thought  that  the  rib  system 
justifies  this,  that  the  ribs  gather  the  thrusts  upon  the  buttresses 
and  give  the  dome  a  somewhat  Gothic  character.  But  this  can- 
not be  so.  It  is  impossible  for  a  dome  to  have  any  Gothic  char- 
acter. In  addition  to  what  has  been  already  said  (p.  20)  on 
this  point,  it  may  be  further  remarked  that,  so  long  as  the  sur- 
faces between  the  ribs  remain  straight  on  plan,  as  in  the  dome 
of  Florence,  or  are  segments  of  a  hemisphere,  or  of  a  dome  of 
pointed  form  on  a  circular  base,  like  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's,  no 
ribs  can  be  made  to  act  in  a  Gothic  way.  A  circular  vault  on 
Gothic  principles  would  necessarily  be  a  celled  vault,  more  or 


Fig.  27. 


less  like  the  small  vault  of  the  Pazzi  already  described  (p.  27). 
In  such  a  vault  there  would  have  to  be  an  arch  (in  a  true  Gothic 
vault  a  much  stilted  arch)  in  the  circumference  of  the  drum 
over  the  space  between  each  pair  of  ribs.  The  crowns  of  these 
arches  would  reach  to  a  considerable  height,  in  a  developed 
Gothic  vault  to  nearly  or  quite  the  height  of  the  crown  of  the 
vault  itself.  The  triangular  spaces  enclosed  by  these  arches 
and  converging  ribs  would  then  be  vaulted  over  by  slightly 
arched  courses  of  masonry  running  lengthwise  of  the  triangle, 
or  from  the  arches  to  the  ribs,  and  approximately  parallel  with 
the  crown  of  the  cell  {A,  Fig.  27).  Thus  in  place  of  an  unbroken 
hemispherical  or  oval  vault,  we  should  have  one  consisting  of 
deep  cells.  The  drum  would  have  to  rise  far  above  the  spring- 
ing, and  the  haunches  would  need  to  be  loaded  with  a  solid  fill- 
ing of  masonry.  The  vault  would  thus  be  completely  hidden 
from  view  on  the  outside.     Nothing  short  of  this  would  produce 


THE  DOME  OF  ST.   PETER'S 


57 


a  circular  vault  on  Gothic  principles,  or  one  in  which  the  ribs 
could  act  in  a  Gothic  way.^  The  nearest  approach  to  such  a 
form,  in  a  vault  that  may  with  any  propriety  be  called  a  dome, 
occurs  over  the  crossing  of  nave  and  transept  in  the  old  cathe- 
dral of  Salamanca  in  Spain  (Fig.  28).^     But  this  vault  has  a 


Fig.  28.  —  Interior  of  dome  of  Salamanca. 


very  different  character  from  the  imaginary  one  just  described. 
It  rises  from  the  top  of  a  high  drum  resting  on  pendentives,  and 
is  built  on  a  system  of  salient  converging  ribs.      The  spaces 

^  A  consistent  exterior  for  such  a  vault  would  not,  of  course,  be  an  unbroken 
drum,  though  a  perfectly  Gothic  circular  vault  might  be  thus  enclosed  within  a 
drum.  A  consistent  external  form  would  require  salient  buttresses  against  the  lines 
of  thrust,  and  the  intervals  between  these  buttresses  would  be  open,  as  in  a  Gothic 
apse. 

2  The  outside  of  this  vault  is  figured  in  my  Development  and  Character  of  Gothic 
Architeclure,  2d  edition,  New  Yo'k  and   London,  The  Macmilian  Co.,  1900,  p.  287. 


S8 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


between  these  ribs  are  vaulted  over  with  courses  of  masonry 
slightly  arched  from  rib  to  rib,  and  thus  running  in  a  direction 
perpendicular  to  that  of  the  courses  in  a  Gothic  vault  cell,  as  in 
By  Figure  27.  A  series  of  hollowed  gores  are  thus  formed  which 
give  a  scalloped  instead  of  a  plain  circular  plan  to  the  vault  as 
a  whole.  But  such  a  vault  differs  fundamentally  from  a  Gothic 
vault.  For  the  line  of  the  crown  of  each  cell  is  the  steep  seg- 
mental curve  ab  in  A,  Figure  29.  In  other  words,  the  vault  as 
a  whole  is  a  hemisphere  with  its  surface  broken  into  shallow 
hollows  like  the  gores  of  a  melon.  It  is  obvious  that  in  a  vault 
with  cells  so  shaped  the  thrusts  are  as  great  at  all  points  in  the 
circumference  as  they  are  in  a  simple  hemispherical  dome,  and 
that  such  a  vault  can  have  no  Gothic  character.     To  develop 


this  into  any  real  likeness  to  a  Gothic  vault,  it  would  be  necessary 
to  reduce  it  to  an  unbroken  circular  plan  by  cutting  off  the 
scallops  at  its  base  so  that  it  would  fit  into  the  circular  drum, 
upon  the  inner  surface  of  which  it  would  now  intersect  in  series 
of  small  arches,  one  for  each  hollowed  gore,  with  its  springing 
at  the  point  d  and  its  crown  at  the  point  c.  Then  these  arches 
would  have  to  be  raised  by  stilting  and  pointing  until  their 
crowns  were  brought  up  to  the  level,  or  near  the  level,  of  the 
point  ^  as  in  -5  of  the  same  figure.  Thus  the  line  dc,  which 
represents  the  height  of  the  arches  in  the  first  stage  of  this 
development,  becomes  the  line  ac  in  the  second  stage.  So  long 
as  the  chord  of  the  arc  be  is  a  steeply  inclined  line,  the  vaulting 
cells  cannot  bear  upon  the  ribs,  nor  can  the  thrusts  of  the  vault 
be  concentrated  in  a  Gothic  way. 


IV  THE  DOME  OF  ST.   PETER'S  59 

The  vault  of  Salamanca  is  not  a  Gothic  vault  in  any  sense, 
though  its  rib  system  and  its  hollowed  cells  conform  with  the 
earliest  stage  of  apsidal  vault  development  leading  to  Gothic.^ 
It  is  a  dome,  and  like  the  larger  dome  of  St.  Peter's,  it  is  sprung 
from  the  top  of  the  drum ;  but  unlike  St.  Peter's  dome,  it  is 
powerfully  abutted  by  turrets  and  dormers  built  against  its 
springing  and  its  haunch,  and  it  is  loaded  at  the  crown  with  a 
cone  of  masonry,  so  that  from  without  it  looks  like  a  stumpy 
spire,  and  not  like  a  dome.^ 

But  Michael  Angelo's  vault  has  not  even  such  remote  ap- 
proach to  Gothic  character  as  the  small  dome  of  Salamanca 
has.  Its  surface  is  unbroken  by  any  hollowing  into  cells.  It 
is  a  perfect  circle  on  plan,  and  its  ribs,  which  are  embedded 
and  not  salient  on  the  inside,  cannot,  therefore,  sustain  the 
vault  in  any  Gothic  way.  This  dome  has,  moreover,  so  much 
of  a  spherical  shape  as  to  give  it  a  stronger  tendency  to  thrust 
than  the  dome  of  Florence  has,  and  the  thrusts  are  exerted 
equally  on  all  points  in  the  circumference  of  the  drum.  The 
isolated  buttresses  are  therefore  illogical,  and  being  set  against 
the  drum  only,  and  not  even  reaching  to  the  top  of  the  drum, 
they  are  ineffectual.  Thus  though  the  dome  was  bound  with 
two  iron  chains,  one  placed  near  the  springing,  and  the  other 
at  about  half  the  vertical  height  of  the  vault,^  it  began  to  yield 
apparently  soon  after  its  completion.  Fissures  opened  in  vari- 
ous parts  of  both  dome  and  drum  which  at  length  caused  such 
apprehensions  of  danger,  that  Pope  Innocent  XI  called  a  coun- 
cil of  the  most  able  engineers  and  architects  of  the  time^  to 
examine  into  the  extent  of  the  damage,  and  ascertain  whether 
serious  danger  existed.  This  council  concluded  that  the  cupola 
was  in  no  danger  of  disintegration,  and  the  Pope,  in  order  to 
restore  confidence  in  its  safety,  charged  Carlo  Fontana,  the 
architect,  to  write  a  book  on  the  building  and  prove  the  ground- 
lessness of  any  fears  of  its  collapse.  Thus  the  matter  appears 
for  the  time  to  have  been  dropped.     But  subsequently  the  con- 

1  Cf.  my  Development  and  Character  of  Gothic  Architecture,  p.  70  et  seq. 

2  The  turrets,  built  upon  the  supporting  piers  of  the  interior,  give  the  outside  of 
the  drum  the  aspect  of  a  massive  lantern. 

^  Cf.  Poleni,  l\femorie  htoriche  delle   Gran   Ctipola  del   Tempio  Vaticano,  e  de' 
Damii  di  eisa,  e  de'  Ristoramenti  loro  (Padua,  1768),  p.  29. 
••  Mili/.ia,  op.  cit.,  vol.  2,  p.  325. 


6o  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  REiYAISSANCE        chap,  iv 

dition  of  the  structure  became  so  alarming  that  three  eminent 
mathematicians,  among  whom  was  the  celebrated  Boscovich, 
were,  in  the  year  1742,  commissioned  by  Pope  Benedict  XIV 
to  make  a  further  examination  and  submit  a  report  with  recom- 
mendations for  its  consolidation. 

The  condition  of  the  fabric  at  the  time  of  this  examination 
will  be  understood  from  Figure  30,  a  reproduction  of  the  illus- 
tration subjoined  to  the  mathematicians'  report.^  They  found 
the  structure,  as  the  illustration  shows,  rent  into  numerous  fis- 
sures, some  of  which  were  large  enough  to  allow  a  man's  arm 
to  be  thrust  through  them.  In  some  places  these  cracks  had 
been  filled  up  with  brick  and  cement,  and  new  ones  had  opened 
in  the  filling.^  At  what  time  the  ruptures  had  commenced  could 
not  be  definitely  ascertained,  but  the  mathematicians  express  the 
opinion,  for  which  they  state  their  reasons,  that  they  may  have 
started  very  soon  after  the  completion  of  the  work.^  That  they 
were  not  due  to  any  weakness  in  the  substructure  was  shown 
by  the  fact  that  this  remained  apparently  quite  firm.  Had  the 
fractures  been  caused  by  any  weakness  in  the  piers  or  penden- 
tives,  the  mathematicians  say,*  they  would  be  wide  at  the  base 
of  the  drum,  whereas  they  were  found  (as  shown  in  the  illus- 
tration) to  be  small  at  the  base  and  to  increase  in  magnitude 
toward  the  top  of  the  drum,  and  in  the  region  of  the  haunch 
of  the  dome.  This  was  thought  by  them  to  show  that  they 
were  clearly  due  to  weakness  resulting  from  the  form  of  the 
structure.  The  report  states^  that  the  weight  of  the  lantern 
had  caused  the  heads  of  the  great  ribs  to  sink,  the  dome  to 
expand  at  the  haunch  and  at  the  springing,  and  the  wall  of  the 
drum  to  be  pressed  outward  at  the  top.  To  consolidate  the 
fabric  they  recommended  that  additional  chains  be  placed  at 
various  levels,  the  old  ones  having,  they  thought,*^  burst  asunder 
by  the  force  of  the  thrusts  ;  but  this  could  not  be  verified  because 
they  are  em'bedded  in  the  masonry.  They  also  recommended 
clamps  of  iron  to  hold  in  the  buttresses. 

The  Marquis  Poleni  of  Padua,  a  distinguished  engineer  of 

^  Parere  di  tre  A/atkematici  sopra  i  danni  che  si  sono  trovato  nella  cupola  di 
S.  Pietro  sul  fine  deW  Anno  MDCCXLII.  Data  per  Ordine  di  tiostro  Signore  Papa 
Benedetto  X/V,  Rome,  1742.  2  i^^jeg  Appendix. 

'  "Cominciato  forsi  poco  dopo  terminata  la  fabrica."     Op.  cit.,  p.  13. 

♦  Ibid.,  p.  14.  8  Ibid.,  p.  15.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  19. 


CVPO  LA    DI   S    PIETRO 

Fig.  30. — The  dome  with  its  ruptures. 
61 


IV  THE  DOME  OF  ST.   PETER'S  63 

safe  as  the  general  tenor  of  his  book  would  lead  us  to  believe. 
And  the  same  misgivings  are  betrayed  in  what  is  said  by  the 
numerous  other  writers  whose  opinions  are  cited  by  him,  though 
like  himself  they  write  for  the  most  part  with  a  manifest  bias  in 
favour  of  Michael  Angelo.  Thus  one  of  these  writers  proposes 
that  the  outer  covering  of  lead  should  be  stripped  off  on  account 
of  its  weight,  and  be  replaced  with  copper,  to  which  Poleni 
objects,^  affirming  that  the  weight  is  an  advantage,  and  tends  to 
hold  the  dome  together.  Another  writer  suggests  that  the 
lantern  be  removed  in  order  to  relieve  the  fabric  of  its  weight. 
Another  thinks  that  the  buttresses  should  be  heavily  weighted 
with  statues.  It  was  also  proposed  that  additional  buttresses 
should  be  set  against  the  attic  of  the  drum,  and  carried  up 
against  the  dome  itself ;  and  again  it  was  proposed  that  massive 
abutments  be  built  up  over  each  of  the  four  great  piers,  but  to 
this  it  was  objected  that  the  additional  weight  of  such  abutments 
would  dangerously  overcharge  the  substructure.  The  most 
radical  suggestion  was  that  both  dome  and  drum  be  demolished 
and  rebuilt  in  a  more  pointed  form.  All  of  these  suggestions 
were  rejected,  and  it  was  finally  decided  to  employ  the  additional 
chains  proposed  by  Poleni  as  already  stated. 

The  dome  of  St.  Peter's  (Plate  III)  was  conceived  in  a  grandi- 
ose spirit,  which,  while  it  drew  inspiration  in  part  from  the  an- 
cient Roman  source,  recklessly  disregarded  the  lessons  which 
Roman  art  should  teach  as  to  principles  of  construction.  I  have 
said  that  Brunelleschi  led  the  way  in  a  wrong  direction  when  he 
set  his  great  dome  on  the  top  of  its  drum,  and  had  resort  to  clamps 
and  chains  for  the  resistance  to  its  thrusts  that  should  have  been 
given  by  abutment.  In  following  his  example,  Michael  Angelo 
wandered  still  farther  from  the  path  of  true  and  monumental 
art.  To  make  a  dome  on  a  large  scale  a  conspicuous  object, 
from  the  springing  to  the  crown,  is  a  thing  that  cannot  be  safely 
done  in  stone  masonry.  To  make  it  stand  at  all,  resort  must 
be  had  to  extraneous  and  hidden  means  of  support,  and  even 
these  are  of  uncertain  efficiency  for  any  length  of  time.  The 
ancient  Roman  and  the  Byzantine  builders  settled,  I  think, 
for  all  time  the  proper  mode  of  constructing  domed  edifices. 
Bramante  had  recognized  this,  and  while  striving  to  include  in 
his  design  for  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's  as  much  as  he  could  of 

1  Op.  cit.,  p.  399. 


64  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

the  new  character  embodied  in  Brunelleschi's  dome,  he  tried  at 
the  same  time  to  keep  safely  within  the  limits  of  the  principles 
that  had  governed  the  ancient  practice.  He  gave  as  much  ele- 
vation to  his  dome  as  he  thought  these  principles  would  allow, 
but  even  this,  as  we  have  seen,  was  too  much,  and  in  greatly- 
increasing  this  elevation,  so  as  to  leave  the  dome  entirely  with- 
out abutment,  Michael  Angelo  took  unwarrantable  risks,  and 
lent  his  genius  to  the  support  of  false  principles. 

That  this  has  not  been  generally  recognized  is  due  to  the 
fact,  already  remarked,  that  the  architects  and  leaders  of  taste 
of  the  Renaissance  have  made  too  little  account  of  structural 
propriety,  and  structural  expression,  as  a  necessary  basis  for 
architectural  design. 

Recent  writers  have  ignored  the  condition  of  this  monument. 
They  do  not  appear  to  be  aware  of  it ;  and  although  it  has  been 
fully  set  forth,  and  discussed  at  great  length  by  the  earlier  Italian 
writers,  few  of  them  have  found  the  true  cause  in  its  flagrant 
violation  of  the  fundamental  laws  of  stability.  They  attributed 
the  alarming  progress  of  disintegration,  as  we  have  seen,  to  acci- 
dents and  circumstances  of  various  kinds ;  and  have  sought  to 
shift  the  responsibility  to  the  shoulders  of  Bramante.  They  have 
affirmed  that  he  did  not  take  enough  care  to  make  his  founda- 
tions secure.  There  appears  to  be  some  justice  in  this,  though 
since  his  work  was  strengthened  by  his  immediate  successors  ^  the 
ruptures  in  the  dome  cannot,  according  to  the  mathematicians, 
be  attributed  to  this.  The  remarks  of  the  old  writers  on  Bra- 
mante must,  I  think,  be  taken  with  some  allowance.  Their  bias 
against  him  is  very  marked.  Thus  Poleni  quotes  Condivi,  a 
disciple  of  Michael  Angelo,  as  saying,  "  Bramante  being,  as 
every  one  knows,  given  to  every  kind  of  pleasure,  and  a  great 
spendthrift,  not  even  the  provision  given  by  the  Pope,  however 
much  it  was,  sufficed  him,  and  seeking  to  expedite  his  work, 
he  made  the  walls  of  bad  materials,  and  of  insufficient  size  and 
strength."  2 

^  The  principal  work  of  Bramante's  immediate  successors  on  the  fabric  itself 
appears  to  have  been  to  strengthen  the  great  piers,  which  seem  to  have  been  built 
too  hastily,  and  on  insecure  foundations.  Poleni  tells  that  in  order  to  strengthen 
these  foundations,  well-holes  were  dug  under  them  and  filled  with  solid  masonry, 
and  that  arches  were  sprung  between  these  sunken  piers,  consolidating  the  whole. 
Op.  cit.,  p.  19.  2  Jbid.,  p.  19, 


IV  THE  DOME  OF  ST.  PETER'S  65 

A  great  deal  has  been  said  of  the  beauty  of  St.  Peter's  dome. 
It  has  been  held  up  as  a  model  of  architectural  elegance  by 
countless  writers  from  Vasari  down.  But  no  abstract  beauty, 
no  impressiveness  as  a  commanding  feature  in  the  general  view 
of  the  ancient  city  that  it  may  have,  can  rnake  amends  for  such 
structural  defects.  Its  beauty  has,  however,  I  think,  been 
exaggerated.  Its  lack  of  visible  organic  connection  with  the 
substructure  makes  it  inferior  in  effect  to  the  dome  of  Florence, 
where  the  structural  lines  of  the  edifice,  from  the  ground 
upward,  give  a  degree  of  organic  unity,  and  the  buttressed  half- 
domed  apses,  grouped  in  happy  subordination  about  the  base  of 
the  drum,  prepare  the  eye  to  appreciate  the  majesty  of  the  soar- 
ing cupola  as  it  rises  over  them.  The  dome  of  St.  Peter's  has 
not  the  beauty  of  logical  composition.  Beauty  in  architecture 
may,  I  think,  be  almost  defined  as  the  artistic  coordination  of 
structural  parts.  As  in  any  natural  organic  form,  a  well-designed 
building  has  a  consistent  internal  anatomy,  and  its  external 
character  is  a  consequence  and  expression  of  this.  The  dome 
of  St.  Peter's  violates  the  true  principles  of  organic  composition, 
and  this  I  believe  to  be  incompatible  with  the  highest  archi- 
tectural beauty. 


CHAPTER   V 

CHURCH   ARCHITECTURE    OF    THE    ROMAN    RENAISSANCE 

As  for  the  rest  of  the  church  of  St.  Peter,  we  need  give 
attention  to  that  part  only  which  was  designed  by  Michael 
Angelo  on  the  basis  of  the  original  scheme  of  Bramante,  namely, 
all  to  the  eastward  of,^  and  including,  the  first  bay  west  of  the 
crossing.  The  western  bays  of  the  nave  as  it  now  stands  were, 
as  is  well  known,  added  at  a  later  time  by  the  architect  Maderna. 
The  plan  (Fig.  31)  of  the  earlier  part  is  thoroughly  fine,  and  if 
the  elevation  had  been  made  consistent  with  this  plan,  St.  Peter's 
might  have  been  one  of  the  noblest  monuments  in  Christendom. 
But  the  architects  of  the  Renaissance  rarely  sought  consistency 
in  design ;  they  were  prone,  from  first  to  last,  to  mix  incon- 
gruous elements.  The  essentially  Byzantine  plan  here  adopted 
could  not  be  carried  out  in  elevation  with  classic  Roman  details 
with  a  noble  result;  and  the  attempt  which  Michael  Angelo 
made  to  produce  an  architectural  effect  foreign  to  the  real 
structural  system  led  of  necessity,  not  only  to  such  inconsist- 
encies as  are  common  in  Renaissance  motives,  but  to  some 
awkward  makeshifts  which  have  not,  I  believe,  been  hitherto 
noticed  by  writers  on  this  edifice. 

Following  what  appears  to  have  been  Bramante's  intention, 
Michael  Angelo  constructed  barrel  vaults  over  the  arms  of  the 
cross,^  supporting  them  on  piers  and  arches  which  had  been 
begun  by  Bramante.  To  this  simple  and  reasonable  scheme  he 
applied  a  colossal  order  of  Corinthian  pilasters,  a  pair  against 
each  pier,  as  Alberti  had  done  on  a  smaller  scale  at  Mantua, 
and  as  Bramante  appears  to  have  intended  in  the  great  piers  of 
the  crossing,  if  not  in  all  of  the  others.  Apart  from  the  super- 
ficial  and   purely  ornamental   character  of   the  order,   and  its 

^  I  call  the  end  of  the  sanctuary  "the  east  end  "  according  to  the  nomenclature 
of  the  usual  orientation.  St.  Peter's,  as  is  well  known,  does  not  conform  to  the 
general  rule  which  has  prevailed  since  the  fifth  century. 

^  These  vaults  may  have  been  begun  by  some  of  his  predecessors.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  make  out  how  far  the  building  had  been  actually  advanced  by  them, 

66 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


67 


inappropriateness  as  ornament  in  such  a  system,  its  exaggerated 
scale  dwarfs  the  effect  of  magnitude  in  the  whole  interior.  The 
eye  naturally  estimates  this  magnitude  by  the  customary  propor- 
tions of  a  large  classic  order,  and  while  these  are  by  no  means 
fixed,  there  is  an  approximate  mean  scale  upon  which  we  base 
our  judgment.  No  beholder  on  entering  St.  Peter's  can,  indeed, 
fail  to  be  impressed  with  the  unusual  size  of  the  order ;  but  he 


Fig.  31.  —  Plan  of  St.  Peter's,  from  Fontana. 


is  not  apt  to  reahze  how  far  it  exceeds  the  largest  orders  of 
antiquity.  The  order  of  the  Parthenon  is  about  forty-five  feet 
high,  and  that  of  the  portico  of  the  Pantheon  is  about  sixty  feet. 
These  are  exceptionally  large  among  the  orders  of  Greek  and 
Roman  antiquity,^  but  the  order  of  St.  Peter's  is  one  hundred 
feet  high. 

1  The  colossal  order  of  the  Temple  of  the  Sun  at  Baalbek  is  so  unique  in  scale, 
and  so  little  known,  that  it  does  not  influence  our  general  notions  of  the  size  of  a 
large  classic  order. 


68  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE        chap,  v 

The  lack  of  due  effect  of  scale  in  this  interior  has  been  often 
remarked,  and  it  is  generally  attributed  to  the  great  magnitude 
of  the  structural  parts.  The  size  of  these  parts  could  not,  how- 
ever, well  be  different  from  what  they  are.  Their  magnitude  is 
determined  by  the  scale  of  the  great  dome  and  the  width  and 
altitude  of  the  arms  of  the  cross.  .The  piers  of  the  crossing  are 
masses  of  masonry  measuring  on  their  longer  sides  more  than 
fifty  feet  on  the  pavement,  while  the  pendentive  arches  are  one 
hundred  and  fifty  feet  high,  and  those  of  the  arms  of  the  cross 
are  seventy-five  feet  high.  But  with  appropriate  treatment  their 
scale  might  have  been  made  more  apparent.  To  adorn  such  piers 
and  frame  such  arches  with  a  classic  order  is  to  destroy  the 
proper  effect  of  scale,  as  well  as  to  violate  the  true  principles  of 
architectural  design  by  using  structural  members  without  any 
structural  meaning. 

Apart  from  the  barbarism  already  remarked  (p.  29)  of 
springing  a  vault  from  a  classic  entablature,  the  effect  of  the 
gigantic  order  is  unhappy  in  other  respects ;  the  great  salience 
of  its  cornice  cuts  off  from  view  the  lower  part  of  the  vaulting, 
and  this  pronounced  overhanging  ledge,  extending  around  the 
whole  interior,  breaks  the  continuity  of  the  upright  lines  into 
the  vaulting,  and  diminishes  the  effect  of  altitude. 

But  not  only  did  Michael  Angelo  employ  this  incongruous 
and  ineffective  ornamental  scheme  for  the  interior  of  St.  Peter's, 
he  also  adopted  a  corresponding  design  for  the  exterior  which 
wholly  contradicts  the  real  character  of  the  structure  and  led 
the  architect  into  some  curious  makeshifts.  For  this  exterior 
he  used  another  gigantic  order  surmounted  with  an  attic  story. 
This  obliged  him  to  carry  up  the  enclosing  walls  of  the  aisles 
to  a  height  equal  to  that  of  the  nave,  and  led  to  difficulties 
within.  For  the  aisle  vaulting  was  now  far  down  below  the 
top  of  these  walls,  and  it  therefore  became  necessary,  unless  the 
space  above  this  vaulting  was  to  be  left  open  to  the  sky,  with 
the  enclosing  wall  standing  as  a  mere  screen  answering  to  noth- 
ing behind  it,^  to  construct  a  flat  roof  at  the  level  of  the  attic 
cornice.  Figure  32,  a  section  through  this  part  of  the  struc- 
ture, will  explain  this  and  some  other  awkward  expedients  to 
which  the  architect  was  driven  by  the  use  of  this  colossal  ex- 
ternal order.     Of  the  two  compartments  through  which  the  line 

^  As  it  actually  does  in  the  western  part  of  the  nave  built  by  Maderna. 


~^^m0M 


tobOp 

M  f-^  \^  ^-^  ^' 

r — ^  ^^^  r~i  r">  >~n 


Q 


Fig.  32.  —  Section  of  aisle  of  St.  Peter's. 


69 


70  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

AB  (plan,  Fig.  31)  passes,  one  has  a  barrel  vault  and  the  other 
a  dome,  and,  as  each  of  the  other  corresponding  parts  of  the 
plan  are  vaulted  in  the  same  way,  there  are  four  small  domes 
in  all.  The  effect  of  four  smaller  domes  grouped  around  the 
great  central  one  would  be  happy  for  both  internal  and  external 
effect,  if  they  were  properly  related  in  proportions,  and  the 
scheme  were  carried  out  in  a  structurally  consistent  and  rational 
way ;  but  such  a  scheme  could  not  be  developed  here.  For 
from  the  level  of  the  aisle  arches  a  dome,  even  on  a  propor- 
tionately high  drum,  could  not  be  made  to  reach  the  level  of 
the  cornice  of  the  enclosing  wall  unreasonably  elevated  for  the 
sake  of  the  gigantic  external  order.  But  Michael  Angelo  never- 
theless constructed  such  a  dome  {A,  Fig.  32),  although  it  had 
to  be  sunk  up  to  its  crown  beneath  the  aisle  roof,  and  then,  for 
external  effect,  he  built  another  dome  over  it  {B,  Fig.  32).  To 
light  the  lower  dome  it  was  necessary  to  sink  oblique  openings, 
Uy  through  the  massive  masonry  of  the  roof,  and  to  light  the 
useless  vaulted  chamber,  b,  which  he  was  obliged  to  make  over 
the  barrel  vault  of  the  inner  compartment  (the  crown  of  which 
is  still  farther  down  below  the  roof),  the  well,  c,  had  to  be  sunk. 
Thus  instead  of  making  a  reasonable  design  with  ornamental 
details  appropriate  to  its  structural  forms,  Michael  Angelo  first 
conceived  an  ornamental  scheme  consisting  of  the  inappropriate 
colossal  order,  and  then  fitted  the  building  to  it,  filling  up  vacant 
spaces  with  extravagantly  massive  solids  and  useless  voids,  and 
resorting  to  other  tortuous  devices  to  piece  out  a  fundamentally 
irrational  system. 

Such  is  St.  Peter's  church,  which,  though  it  has  been  much 
criticised,  has  been  more  generally  lauded  as  a  model  of  archi- 
tectural greatness.  Its  real  character  has  rarely  been  analyzed 
or  rationally  considered.  That  it  has  quaHties  of  majesty  and 
grandeur  need  not  be  denied ;  but  these  quahties  are  mainly 
due  to  its  vast  magnitude,  and  to  what  it  retains  of  the  design 
of  its  first,  and  greatest,  architect.  The  manner  in  which  the 
scheme  of  Bramante  was  modified  and  distorted  by  his  succes- 
sors, and  chiefly  by  Michael  Angelo,  notwithstanding  his  pro- 
fessions of  admiration  for  Bramante's  intentions,  is  far  from 
admirable,  as  I  think  the  foregoing  account  of  its  structural 
and  artistic  aberrations  must  show.  The  building  as  a  whole 
is  characterized  by  incongruity  and  extravagance,  and  when  we 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


71 


consider  further  that  the  ornamentation  of  the  interior  is  for  the 
most  part  a  cheap  deception,  the  rich  coffering  of  the  vaulting 
and  the  pilasters  of  the  great  order  being  wrought  in  stucco  on 
a  foundation  of  brickwork,  we  get  the  measure  of  the  ideals  and 
architectural  standards  of  men  who,  like  Vasari,  could  write  of 
it  that,  "  not  in  Christendom,  nor  in  all  the  world,  can  a  build- 
ing of  greater  magnificence  and  grandeur  be  seen."  ^  And  this 
short-sighted  admiration  did  not  abate  as  time  went  on,  as  we 
learn  from  the  estimates  quoted  by  Fontana  in  his  well-known 
book,2  among  which  are  the  following  :  "  Temple  more  famous 
than  that  of  Solomon,"  "  Unique  miracle  of  the  world,"  "  Chief 
among  the  most  celebrated  of  Christendom,"  "  Compendium  of 
the  arts,"  "  Basis  of  the  Catholic  faith,"  "  Unique  edifice  of  the 
orb  of  earth,"  etc.,  etc. 

Before  leaving  St.  Peter's  a  word  may  be  said  of  a  project 
for  the  building  which  was  prepared  by  Antonio  San  Gallo  the 
younger,  Michael  Angelo's  immediate  predecessor  as  architect 
for  the  fabric.  This  design,  no  part  of  which  was  ever  car- 
ried out,  is  embodied  in  a  wooden  model  preserved  with  that 
of  Michael  Angelo  in  the  existing  edifice.  The  most  meritori- 
ous feature  of  this  model  is  the  dome  which,  from  a  structural 
point  of  view,  is  better  than  the  one  that  was  built,  since  it  is 
well  abutted  both  at  the  springing  and  at  the  haunch.  This 
important  condition  is  secured,  however,  by  an  architectural 
treatment  that  cannot  be  commended,  and  consists  of  two  super- 
imposed concentric  arcades,  the  lower  one  surrounding  the  drum 
and  abutting  the  vault  at  the  springing,  while  the  upper  one  is 
set  in  retreat  and  fortifies  the  haunch.  The  architectural  effect 
of  these  arcades,  which  are  of  course  adorned  with  classic 
orders,  is  not  happy  because  an  arcade  with  a  classic  order  is 
not  an  appropriate  form  of  abutment,  though  it  may  be  made 
mechanically  effective,  and  also  because  the  upper  circle,  rising 
from  within  the  circumference  of  the  lower  one,  gives  the 
composition  an  unpleasantly  telescopic  effect. 

Our  consideration  of  St.  Peter's  has  led  us  to  an  advanced 
phase  of  the  church  architecture  of  the  Roman  Renaissance, 
and  we  must  now  go  back  and  examine  a  few  of  the  earlier 

1  Le  Vite,  etc.,  vol.  7,  p.  249. 

2  //  Tempio  Vaticano  e  sua  Origine,  etc.  Discritto  dal  Cav.  Carlo  Fontana, 
Rome,  1694,  vol,  2,  p.  406. 


72 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


i 


\- 


structures  in  Rome  and  elsewhere  that  were  produced  under  the 
distinctly  Roman  influence. 

The  church  of  Sant'  Agostino  is  spoken  of  as  a  building  of 
the  early  Roman  Renaissance,  and  is  said  to  have  been  built  by 
the  architect  Giacomo  da  Pietra  Santa  between  1471  and  1484. 
But  it  is  incredible  that  such  a  church  could  have  been  designed 
by  any  architect  of  the  Renaissance,  or  by  an 
Italian  architect  of  any  time.  Letarouilly  says 
of  it  that  from  the  thirteenth  century  the  Augus- 
tinians  had  a  convent  and  small  church  in  Rome, 
and  that  two  centuries  later  they  resolved  to  en- 
large the  church,  and  employed  as  architects 
Giacomo  da  Pietra  Santa  and  a  Florentine  named 
Sebastiano.^  The  character  of  the  building  is 
such,  however,  as  to  warrant  the  belief  that  it  is  a 
mediaeval  structure  with  slight  interior  ornamental 
additions  of  the  Renaissance,  which  may  be  by 
Pietra  Santa,  and  a  facade,  dating  from  before  the 
close  of  the  fifteenth  century,  by  Baccio  Pintelli. 
In  general  character  the  church  is  in  the  style  of 
the  Rhenish  Romanesque  architecture  of  the 
twelfth  century.  It  has  a  nave  with  groined  vault- 
ing in  square  compartments,  each  embracing  two 
vault  compartments  of  the  aisles.  It  has  also 
the  Rhenish  alternate  system  with  plain  square 
piers,  and  archivolts  of  square  section,  origi- 
nally without  mouldings,  and  the  main  piers  have 
each  a  broad  pilaster-strip  carried  up  to  the 
springing  of  the  vaults.  The  triforium  space  has 
no  openings,  and  the  clerestory  has  plain  round- 
arched  windows.  It  is  thus  a  thoroughly  northern 
Romanesque  scheme,  entirely  logical  in  its  simple  construction 
and  fine  in  its  proportions.  The  Renaissance  interpolations 
consist  of  a  few  ornamental  details  only.  A  stilted  com- 
posite column  is  set  against  the  pilaster-strip  of  each  main 
pier  (Fig.  33),  this  column  is  crowned  with  an  entablature-block 
reaching  to  the  level  of  the  triforium,  and  upon  it  is  set  a  short 
pilaster  surmounted  with  a  smaller  entablature-block  at  the  vault- 
ing impost.    This  superfluous  and  irrational  compound,  breaking 

^  Letarouilly,  Edifices  de  Rome  Moderne,  Paris,  i860,  p.  350, 


h 


'M 


Fig.  II. 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


73 


the  reasonable  and  effective  continuity  of  the  mediaeval  pilaster- 
strip,  greatly  disfigures  the  originally  noble  design.  The  only 
other  neo-classic  details  of  the  interior  are  mouldings  at  the 
arch  imposts  and  on  the  archivolts,  and  coffering  on  the  soffits 
of  the  arches.  These  are  quiet  and  less  injurious  in  effect, 
though  equally  superfluous  and    inappropriate.     Thus  did  the 


Fig.  34.  —  Fa9ade  of  Sant'  Agostino. 

sophistication  of  the  Renaissance  designers  often  blind  them  to 
real  architectural  excellence,  and  lead  them  to  fancy  that  they 
could  improve  such  an  admirable  and  consistent  interior  by 
incongruous  and  meaningless  features. 

The  faijade  (Fig.  34)  is  wholly  of  the  Renaissance,  and  has 
no  mediaeval  character  except  in  its  general  outline,  which  con- 
forms with  that  of  the  building  itself.     It  is  a  simple  design, 


74  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

and  foreshadows  those  of  Vignola  and  Delia  Porta  for  the 
church  of  the  Gesu,  to  which  it  is  superior  in  merit,  being  more 
reasonable  and  quiet.  Shallow  pilasters  of  considerable  elegance 
mark  the  divisions  of  the  interior,  the  portals  are  framed  with 
simple  classic  mouldings  without  orders,  and  the  aisle  compart- 
ments are  surmounted  with  reversed  consoles  after  the  manner  of 
those  introduced  by  Alberti  in  the  facade  of  Santa  Maria  Novella 
in  Florence.  These  consoles  are,  however,  so  different  in  char- 
acter from  the  rest  of  the  fagade,  having  their  details  in  higher 
relief  and  being  set  a  little  in  retreat,  that  they  would  appear 
to  be  later  interpolations.  Answering  to  nothing  in  the  building, 
they  are  superfluous  ornaments,  and  do  not  improve  the  compo- 
sition, which  without  them  is  as  reasonable  as  a  composition 
made  up  of  superficial  classic  details  can  well  be,  A  peculiar 
feature  of  this  front  is  the  truncated  pediment  that  crowns  the 
lower  division,  and  forms  the  basis  of  the  clerestory  compartment. 
The  small  rectangular  tablets  that  break  the  wall  surfaces  are 
also  noticeable  as  foreshadowing  a  treatment  that  was  subse- 
quently much  affected  by  Vignola.  Contemporaneously  with 
the  fagade,  and  by  the  same  architect,  a  dome  on  a  drum  resting 
on  pendentives  was  built  over  the  crossing.  The  present  dome 
rising  directly  from  the  pendentives  is  an  alteration  of  a  later  time. 
In  the  earlier  churches  that  were  wholly  built  under  the 
Roman  Renaissance  influence,  the  Byzantine  scheme  largely 
prevails  in  the  plan  and  structural  forms,  probably  because  it 
lent  itself  to  the  most  effective  display  of  a  high  central  dome. 
Among  the  first  of  these  buildings  is  the  church  of  Santa  Maria 
della  Consolazione  outside  the  wall  at  Todi.  The  design  is 
attributed  to  Bramante,^  and  it  seems  to  bear  enough  resem- 
blance to  what  we  know  of  his  work  to  justify  the  attribution. 
The  arms  of  the  cross  here  take  the  form  of  apses,  the  eastern 
one  being  semicircular  on  plan,  and  the  others  polygonal.  The 
dome  (Fig.  35)  is  raised  on  a  high  drum,  and  is  almost  an  exact 
reproduction  of  that  of  San  Pietro  in  Montorio.  Its  thrusts  are 
thus  entirely  unbuttressed,  but  it  is  probably  bound  with  chains, 
as  was  the  custom  at  this  time  in  domes  constructed  in  this 
manner .2  The  half-domes  of  the  apses  are  better  adjusted. 
They  spring  from  within  the  supporting  walls,  which  are  carried 

1  Milizia,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  144,  affirms  that  it  is  by  Bramante. 
*  Cf.  Fontana,  op.  cit.,  vol.  2,  p.  363. 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


75 


up  high  enough  to  give  effective  abutment,  and  are  loaded  at 
the  haunch  by  stepped  rings  of  masonry,  as  in  the  Pantheon. 
The  details  of  the  interior  (Fig.  36  )  consist  of  two  superimposed 
orders  of  small  pilasters,  with  great  pilasters  on  the  angles  of 


Fk;.  35.  —  Exterior  of  Santa  Maria  della  Consolazione,  Todi. 


the  crossing  reaching  from  the  pavement  to  the  springing  of  the 
pendentive  arches,  and  from  ressauts  of  the  upper  entablature 
converging  ribs  rise  against  the  surfaces  of  the  vaults.  Several 
further  awkward  results  are  here  noticeable  as  a  consequence 
of  this  application  of  the  inappropriate  classic  details  to   the 


76 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


Byzantine  structural  scheme.  The  entablature  which  is  car- 
ried around  the  whole  interior  at  the  springing  of  the  vaults, 
has  to  do  duty  at  once  for  the  small  order  of  the  upper  stage 


Fig.  36.  —  Interior  of  Todi. 


and  for  the  great  angle  pilasters,  and  thus  in  so  far  as  it  is  in 
good  proportion  for  the  one  it  cannot  be  so  for  the  other.  Then 
the  true  magnitudes  of  the  piers  and  the  pendentive  arches  are 
falsified  by  the  pilasters  and  simulated  archivolts  which  spring 
from  them.     These  piers  and  arches  really  embrace  in  width 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


77 


both  the  pilasters  and  archivolts  and  the  spaces  of  wall  and 
vaulting  between  them  and  the  pilasters  of  the  smaller  orders 
and  ribs  which  spring  from  them.  The  proper  and  impressive 
massiveness  of  the  essentially  Byzantine  system  employed  is  thus 
contradicted  by  an  apparent  skeleton  of  classic  orders  simulat- 
ing an  organic  structural  scheme  which  has  no  real  existence. 


Fig.  37.  —  Plan  of  San  liiagio. 


The  exterior  of  this  monument  (Fig.  35)  has  much  merit  in 
its  general  form  and  proportions.  The  great  central  square 
mass,  visible  from  the  ground  upward,  gives  the  sense  of  sup- 
port for  the  dome  which  the  eye  demands,  and  the  apses  with 
their  half-domes  are  effectively  grouped  in  subordination  to  the 
crowning  feature.  But  this  merit,  which  Todi  shares  with  many 
other  buildings  of  the  Renaissance,  is  primarily  due  to  the 
Byzantine  scheme  adopted,  and  cannot,  therefore,  be  wholly 
credited  to  the  Renaissance  architect. 

A  variation  of  this  scheme  occurs  in  the  church  of  San  Biagio 


78 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 


at  Montepulciano  by  Antonio  San  Gallo  the  elder,  and  begun  in 
the  year  1518.  Here  the  arms  of  the  cross  (Fig.  37)  are  square, 
with  an  apse  added  to  the  eastern  arm.  The  interior  is  orna- 
mented with  a  single,  and  very  heavy,  Doric  order  (Fig.  38), 
framing    arched    recesses    in    the    imperial    Roman    manner. 


Fig.  38.  —  Interior  of  San  Biagio. 


The  use  of  pilasters  on  the  angles  makes  the  awkward  combi- 
nation of  a  pilaster  coupled  with  a  column  necessary,  and  since 
the  entablature  is  in  the  plane  of  the  wall,  it  has  to  be  broken 
into  very  salient  ressauts  in  order  to  cover  these  members. 
Above  the  entablature  is  a  low  ledge  in  retreat,  broken  into 
ressauts  in  conformity  with  those  of  the  entablature,  and  from 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


79 


these  ressauts  coffered  archivolts  are  sprung  under  the  ends  of 
the  barrel  vaults  which  cover  the  arms  of  the  cross.  The  Doric 
order  is  designed  here,  for  the  most  part,  in  close  conformity  to 
ancient  models,  save  for  the  pilaster  on  the  angle,  which  does 
not  generally  occur 
in  Roman  monu- 
ments. The  com- 
mon Roman  treat- 
ment of  the  angle  is 
shown  in  the  arch  of 
Septimius  [Severus 
(Fig.  20,  p.  41), 
where  the  end  col- 
umn of  the  order  is 
placed  at  some  dis- 
tance from  the  end 
of  the  fagade,  which 
is  left  in  retreat 
without  any  pilas- 
ter. But  Serlio  ^ 
describes  the  ruins 
of  an  ancient  Roman 
building  (Fig.  39) 
that  appears  to  have 
been  a  sort  of  open 
arcade  or  stoa,  used 
as  a  meeting  place 
for  merchants,  on 
the  angles  of  which 
pilasters  are  set  to- 
getherwith  columns, 
somewhat  as  they 
were  by  Alberti  in 
Santa  Maria  Novella, 
by  San  Gallo  here 
in  San  Biagio,  and  by  many  other  architects  of  the  Renaissance. 
He  speaks  of  the  treatment  of  the  angles  of  this  building  as 
follows  :  "  The  corner  pilasters  are  larger  than  the  others,  and 
were  truly  made  with  excellent  judgment,  for  they  strengthen 

1  Bk.  3,  p.  54. 


Fig.  39. 


So 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


the  angle  with  good  effect ;  and  from  this  architects  may  learn 
how  to  design  angles  with  columns  and  pilasters  bound  together. 


Fig.  40. —  San  Biagio,  Montepulciano, 

in  order  that  the  corner  may   be  brought  into  line   with  the 
column,  which  gives  more  solidity  to  the  angle.      If  the  said 


V  THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE  8i 

angle  were  withdrawn  into  line  with  the  middle  pilasters,  the 
fagade,  when  viewed  obliquely,  with  the  round  column  on  the 
angle,  would  appear  imperfect,  and  for  this  ...  I  strongly 
commend  this  form  of  angle  because  it  may  be  fully  seen  from 
all  sides." 

Externally  the  composition  is  remarkably  good  in  its  larger 
features  (Fig.  40).  The  dome,  of  slightly  pointed  outline,  on  a 
high  drum,  rises  grandly  from  the  substructure,  and  is  well  pro- 
portioned in  relation  to  it.  The  wall  surfaces  are  treated 
broadly,  with  no  orders  carried  across  them.  They  are  divided 
into  two  stages,  with  a  pediment  over  each  facade.  Super- 
imposed pilasters  are  set  on  the  angles,  and  a  Doric  entablature, 
carried  across  the  whole  front,  with  ressauts  over  the  lower 
pilasters,  divides  the  two  stages.  The  wall  of  the  lower  stage 
is  entirely  plain,  with  a  severely  simple  rectangular  portal  sur- 
mounted by  a  pediment.  The  wall  of  the  upper  stage  is  divided 
into  rectangular  panels,  as  in  the  attic  of  the  Pazzi  chapel  in 
Florence,  the  central  panel  being  pierced  with  a  square-headed 
window  and  framed  with  an  order  of  which  the  capitals  are 
Ionic  and  the  entablature  Doric.  The  cornice  of  the  top  story 
and  the  raking  cornice  of  the  pediment  of  each  facade  are 
broken  into  ressauts  over  the  pilasters,  and  an  order  of  Ionic 
pilasters,  with  a  very  high  entablature  broken  into  ressauts, 
surrounds  the  drum  which  supports  the  dome.  Square 
detached  towers  are  set  in  the  reentrant  angles  of  the  west 
side,  only  one  of  which  was  carried  to  completion.  The  com- 
pleted one  is  in  three  stages,  each  adorned  with  a  heavy 
order,  Doric,  Ionic,  and  Corinthian  respectively.  In  these 
orders  half-columns  are  coupled  with  angle  pilasters,  as  in  the 
interior,  and  the  entablatures  have  ressauts  on  the  angles  over 
these  members.  An  octagonal  spire-like  lantern,  with  a  tall 
drum  adorned  with  an  order  of  Corinthian  pilasters  and  sur- 
mounted by  an  attic,  crowns  the  tower.  Small  obelisks  set  on 
the  tower  angles  and  reversed  consoles  against  the  angles  of 
the  attic  give  a  simulation  of  Gothic  form  to  the  neo-classic 
scheme,  and  show  the  strong  hold  that  mediaeval  ideas  still 
retained  upon  the  minds  of  the  designers.  The  first  of  these  spire- 
like towers  of  the  Renaissance  appears  to  be  that  of  the  church 
of  Santo  Spirito  in  Florence,  which  is  spoken  of  by  Milizia  as 
the  most  beautiful  of  Italian  bell  towers.^     It  was  designed  by 

G  1  op.  cit.,  vol.  2,  p.  240. 


82 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


Baccio  d'  Agnolo,  who,  beginning  as  a  wood  carver,  imbibed  the 
new  enthusiasm  for  the  antique,  and  after  studying  the  ancient 

monuments  of  Rome  ^  began  the  prac- 
tice of  architecture.  This  campanile 
is  thus  noteworthy  as  the  first  of  a 
large  class  of  modern  towers  with 
spires  of  which  Wren's  famous 
steeples  were  the  ultimate  outcome. 
The  scheme  is  based  on  the  mediaeval 
campanile,  the  earliest  form  of  which 
is  the  Lombard  Romanesque  tower. 
The  Lombard  tower  is  characterized 
by  its  simple  rectangular  outline,  the 
walls  rising  sheer  from  the  ground 
to  the  cornice,  and  strengthened  and 
adorned  with  shallow  pilaster-strips, 
corbelled  string-courses  marking  the 
successive  stories,  and  by  small 
grouped  openings.  The  tower  of 
Santa  Maria  Novella  in  Florence  is 
designed  on  this  model,  and  the  neigh- 
bouring tower  of  Prato  and  Giotto's 
famous  campanile  are  later  and  richer 
modifications  of  the  same  type.  In 
the  tower  of  Santo  Spirito  (Fig.  41) 
Baccio  d'  Agnolo  has  taken  the 
Lombard  scheme  and  clothed  it  with 
a  pseudo-classic  dress.  While  his 
classic  details  have  much  of  that 
elegance  which  belongs  to  the  best 
Italian  work,  they  are  out  of  place  in 
such  a  structure.  The  tall  pilaster- 
strips  of  the  mediaeval  tower  gave  an 
expression  as  of  an  organic  skeleton 
running  through  the  building.  They 
had  been  developed  out  of  the  classic 
pilaster  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  mediaeval  type  of  structure,  and 
in  substituting  the  superimposed  classic  orders  for  the  appro- 
priate continuous  members,  the  artist  did  violence  to  the  true 
principles  of  design. 

1  op.  cit.,  vol.  2,  p.  239. 


irw'Miljiiifiif 

Fig.  41.  — Tower  of  Santo  Spirito. 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


83 


The  lantern  with  which  this  tower  is  crowned  is  an  adapta- 
tion of  Brunelleschi's  lantern  on  the  dome  of  the  cathedral,  but 
made  more  aspiring  in  form,  so  that  the  general  outline  is  like 
that  of  a  Gothic  spire.  But  the  form  of  a  Gothic  spire  is  far 
removed  from  anything 
that  is  proper  to  classic 
composition. 

Returning  to  San 
Biagio,  it  may  be  said 
that  the  orders  here 
have  a  closer  conformity 
with  those  of  classic 
antiquity  than  occurs  in 
the  earlier  monuments 
already  mentioned,  ex- 
cept the  Tempietto  of 
San  Pietro  in  Montorio 
by  Bramante. 

In  the  nave  of  the 
church  of  Santissima 
Annunziatta  in  Arezzo, 
the  same  architect  pro- 
duced a  different  design. 
The  nave  (Fig.  42),  of 
only  three  bays,  is 
covered  with  a  barrel 
vault,  and  the  aisles  have 
small  domes  on  penden- 
tives.  The  supporting 
piers  are  square  with  a 
shallow  Corinthian  pilas- 
ter on  the  face  of  each 
and  an  entablature  pass- 
ing over  the  crowns  of 
the  arches.  The  archi- 
volts  are  deep,  and  each 
one  is  moulded  on  the  face  and  plain  on  the  soffit.  These 
are  carried  on  plain  pilasters  with  simple  impost  mouldings. 
The  wall  above  the  entablature  is  plain  and  unbroken,  except 
by  a  round-arched  window  over  each  bay  of  the  ground  story, 


Fig.  42.  — Santissima  Annunziatta,  Arezzo. 


84  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

and  is  crowned  with  a  heavy  cornice  from  which  the  vaulting 
springs.  We  have  here  a  structural  system  of  imperial  Roman 
massiveness,  necessitated  by  the  use  of  the  great  barrel  vault. 

After  the  early  part  of  the  sixteenth  century  Italy  produced 
few  architects  of  a  high  order  of  genius.  Most  of  the  more 
advanced  neo-classic  art  is  the  work  of  mediocre  men  who,  while 
professing  to  be  ardent  advocates  of  grammatical  correctness  ac- 
cording to  the  ancient  rules,  were  hardly  less  capricious  in  their 
misuse  of  classic  elements  than  their  predecessors  had  been.  To 
enter  upon  the  examination  of  any  large  number  of  buildings  in 
this  later  Renaissance  style  would  be  tedious  and  unnecessary ; 
but  in  addition  to  what  we  have  already  seen  of  it  in  the  work  of 
Michael  Angelo  in  St.  Peter's,  we  may  give  some  attention  to  a 
few  characteristic  works  of  the  two  leading  architects  of  the 
later  time :  Vignola  and  Palladio. 

Few  men  did  more  to  make  the  neo-classic  ideas  authorita- 
tive than  Giacomo  Barrozzi,  called  Vignola.  Beginning  like  so 
many  others  with  painting,  Vignola  was  led  early  to  the  study  of 
architecture,  in  which  he  strove  to  gain  an  exact  knowledge 
of  classic  Roman  forms  by  drawing  and  measuring  the  remains 
of  the  ancient  edifices.  He  thus  became  a  devoted  partisan  of 
the  antique,  and  he  wrote  a  treatise  on  the  Five  Orders 
which  has  been  widely  accepted  as  an  authoritative  guide  in 
modern  architectural  practice.  To  him,  says  Milizia,  "  Archi- 
tecture is  under  lasting  obligations  because  he  established  it 
upon  system,  and  prescribed  its  rules."  ^  And  the  same  author 
tells  us  further  that  Vignola  "  purified  architecture  from  some 
abuses  which  neither  his  contemporaries  nor  the  ancients  had 
perceived " ;  yet  nevertheless,  he  adds,  "  his  book  has  pro- 
duced more  harm  than  good,  for  to  make  the  rules  more  general, 
and  more  easy  of  application,  he  has  altered  the  finest  propor- 
tions of  the  antique."  No  system  of  architecture,  MiHzia  says 
further,  "  is  more  easy  than  that  of  Vignola,  but  the  facility  of 
it  is  obtained  at  the  expense  of  architecture  itself." 

In  his  book,2  which  is  made  up  largely  of  drawings  and  dia- 
grams, Vignola  shows  how  the  proportions  of  an  order  may  be 
regulated  by  a  module  down  to  the  smallest  details.  He  explains 
how  to  construct  Ionic  volutes  and  other  curves  from  centres, 
and  how   to  describe  the   details  of  Corinthian  and  composite 

^  Memorie,  etc.,  vol.  2,  p.  36.  ^  /  Cinque  Ordine  d^  Architeflura. 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


8S 


capitals  by  means  of  plan  and  elevation.  He  thus  introduces 
a  mechanical  system  modelled  after  the  formulas  of  Vitruvius. 
But  notwithstanding  his  ardent  advocacy  of  the  principles 
of  ancient  Roman  art,  Vignola,  in  his  own  practice,  not  only 
altered  the  proportions  of  the  orders  as  MiHzia  says,  but  made 
many  fanciful  changes  in  them.  He  introduced  details  which 
have  no  counterparts  in  correct  Roman  design,  and  freely  mixed 
those  of  different  orders.     An   instance  of   this  occurs   in   an 


Fig.  43.  —  Vignola's  entablature. 


entablature  figured  in  his  book,^  which  he  calls  his  own  inven- 
tion. In  this  composition  (Fig.  43)  we  have  a  pseudo-Doric 
frieze  between  an  architrave  with  multiplied  faciae,  and  a  cornice 
on  modillions.  In  the  place  of  triglyphs  this  frieze  has  consoles 
with  two  channels,  Hke  those  of  a  triglyph,  on  the  curved  face 
of  each.  To  such  travesties  of  classic  design  did  the  striving 
after  novelty,  which  was  curiously  mingled  with  their  ardour 
for  the  antique,  lead  the  men  of  the  later  Renaissance.  For  an 
advocate  of  classic  correctness  such  aberrations  are  the  more 

1  op.  cit.,  plate  32. 


86 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


surprising  as  they  are  expressly  condemned  by  Vitruvius,  who 
warns  his  readers  against  them  as  follows  :  '*  If  dentiled  cornices 
are  used  in  the  Doric  order,  triglyphs  appUed  above  the  voluted 
Ionic,  thus  transferring  parts  to  one  order  which  properly  belong 
to  another,  the  eye  will  be  offended,  because  custom  otherwise 
apphes  these  pecuHarities."  ^  The  Roman  writer  might,  indeed, 
have  given  a  better  reason  why  the  purity  of  the  orders  ought 
to  be  maintained,  namely,  because  to  each  of  them  the  fine 
artistic  genius  of  the  Greeks  had  given  its  appropriate  details. 

In  designing  entire  buildings  Vignola  shows  no  less  freedom 
in  unclassic  and  incongruous  combinations.  This  is  manifested 
in  the  earliest  of  his  church  edifices,  that  of  Sant'  Andrea  di  Ponte 


Fig.  44.  —  Half  plan  of  Sant'  Andrea. 

Molle  outside  of  the  Porta  del  Popolo  at  Rome  (Figs.  44,  45,  and 
46).  It  is  a  small,  oblong,  rectangular  enclosure  covered  with  a 
dome  of  oval  plan  on  pendentives.  The  structural  scheme  is  thus 
primarily  Byzantine,  but  the  architectural  treatment  is  Roman. 
The  dome  is  built  in  a  praiseworthy  form,  and  follows  the  con- 
struction of  the  dome  of  the  Pantheon.  An  enclosing  drum  is 
carried  up  from  the  pendentives  to  a  considerable  height,  and 
the  haunch  of  the  vault  is  well  fortified  by  stepped  rings  of 
masonry.  These  rings  are  criticised  by  Milizia^as  awkward  and 
unnecessary  because,  he  affirms,  the  vault  might  have  been  made 
secure  without  them.  He  probably  means  that  it  might  have 
been  bound  with  chains  in  the  usual  manner  of  the  Renaissance. 
As  in  the  Pantheon,  the  drum  rises  so  high  above  the  springing 
that  but  little  of  the  dome  is  visible  externally.  The  character 
of  the  rectangular  substructure  is  puzzling  to  the  eye  of  a 
beholder  who  looks  for  meaning  and  congruity  in  architectural 
forms.     Wrought  in  shallow  reUef  upon  its  facade  is  an  order 

1  Bk.  I,  chap.  I.  2  op.  cit.,  vol.  2,  p.  30. 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


87 


of  Corinthian  pilasters  surmounted  by  a  classic  pediment,  and 
the  entablature  of  the  order  is  returned  on  the  sides  of  the 
building.  The  effect  of  the  whole  may  be  compared  to  that  of 
a  Greek  temple  with  an  attic  supporting  a  dome  built  upon  it. 
So  awkward  is  the  combination  that  it  might  be  supposed  to  be 
a  piece  of  patchwork  in  which  a  building  of  Greek  temple  form 
had  been  altered  to  gain  more  height  within,  were  it  not  that 


Fig.  45. —  Longitudinal  section  of  Sant'  Andrea,  from  Vignola's  book. 


we  find  in  the  architect's  own  book  the  plan  and  section  repro- 
duced in  Figs.  44  and  45,  which  show  that  the  building  as 
it  now  exists  was  originally  designed  in  its  present  form.^ 

On  reflection  we  discover  that  the  scheme  suggests  a  deriva- 
tion from  the  Pantheon.     Not  only  is  the  dome   shaped   and 

1  The  drawings  are  found  in  the  addendum  to  the  edition  of  1617,  plates  7  and  8. 


88 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


adjusted  as  in  that  ancient  monument,  save  for  its  oval  plan, 
but  the  rest  of  the  composition  is  pretty  clearly  from  the  same 
source.  To  realize  this  it  is  necessary  only  to  eliminate,  in  idea, 
the  portico  of  the  Pantheon  with  the  exception  of  its  pediment, 
and  to  conceive  this  pediment  as  drawn  back  into  the  plane  of 
the  rectangular  facade.  The  pediment  would  then  surmount  the 
order  of  Corinthian  pilasters  which  adorn  this  fagade,  and  the 


Fig.  46.  —  Sant'  Andrea  di  Ponte  Molle. 

resulting  composition  would  be  substantially  identical  with  that 
of  the  fagade  of  St.  Andrea.  The  minor  differences  are  unim- 
portant, as  where  Vignola  has  placed  a  pair  of  pilasters,  instead 
of  only  one,  at  each  end  of  the  facade,  has  given  the  whole 
order  more  shallow  relief,  and  has  omitted  the  fluting  on  the 
pilasters.  Even  the  niches  on  either  side  of  the  portal  are 
reproduced  from  the  Pantheon,  though  Vignola  has  pierced 
them  with  windows. 

The  likeness  extends  farther.     The  return  of  the  entablature 


V  THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE  89 

along  the  side  walls  and  the  cornice  of  the  attic  are  the  same 
in  both  instances ;  but  the  second  pediment  in  the  Pantheon 
fagade  Vignola  has  not  reproduced.  St.  Andrea  is  thus  a  close, 
though  a  modified,  copy  of  the  rectangular  part  of  the  Pantheon, 
with  the  rectangle  elongated  and  surmounted  by  a  dome 
designed  on  the  Pantheon  model.  It  was  not  known  in  the 
sixteenth  century  that  the  ancient  monument  is  not  a  homo- 
geneous structure,  but  an  awkward  patchwork,  the  result  of 
successive  alterations  and  additions.^  Vignola  took  it  entire 
as  an  example  of  that  ancient  style  which  he  regarded  as 
authoritative,  and  based  his  design  for  St.  Andrea  upon  it, 
just  as  many  modern  architects  have  taken  motives  from  Vig- 
nola himself.  If  it  were  proposed  to  erect  a  dome  upon  the 
Parthenon,  few  people  would  fail  to  see  that  the  result  would  be 
an  architectural  monstrosity,  yet  this  would  not  be  very  different 
from  what  was  done  in  St.  Andrea  by  an  architect  who  has  been 
looked  upon  as  a  champion  of  classic  correctness  in  design. 

M.  Palustre  has  called  attention  to  the  fact  that,  in  the 
interior  of  St.  Andrea  (Fig.  45),  the  two  parts  of  the  entabla- 
ture which  have  no  raison  d'eti'e  under  a  vault  have  been 
omitted.^  But  the  impropriety  of  a  complete  entablature  in 
connection  with  vaulting  is  no  greater  than  that  of  any  part  of 
a  classic  order,  which  has  no  justification  in  such  connection, 
as  we  have  already  remarked. 

The  pilgrimage  church  of  Santa  Maria  degli  Angeli,  built 
over  the  oratory  of  St.  Francis  at  Assisi,  is  a  more  extensive  monu- 
ment which  was  begun  by  Vignola  in  the  year  1569.  Though 
completed  by  other  architects,  and  extensively  restored  in  1832, 
the  building  as  it  now  stands  is  uniform  in  style  throughout,  and 
bears  the  marks  of  Vignola's  manner  of  design.  It  is  cruciform 
in  plan,  with  a  long  nave  and  aisles,  and  a  square  chapel  open- 
ing out  of  each  bay  of  each  aisle.  The  nave  and  transept  have 
barrel  vaulting,  a  half-dome  covers  the  apse,  and  a  dome  on  a 
high  drum  resting  on  pendentives  rises  over  the  crossing.     The 

^  Recent  investigations,  the  results  of  which  are  set  forth  by  Signor  Beltrami 
(^11  Pantheon,  Luca  Beltrami,  Milan,  1898),  have  shown  that  the  existing  portico  is 
of  later  date  than  either  the  rotunda  or  the  rectangular  front  against  which  it  is  set. 

2  "A  I'interieur,  pourtourne  de  pilastres  egalement  Corinthiens,  deux  parties  de 
I'entablement  qui  n'ont  pas  leur  raison  d'etre  sous  une  voute,  c*est-a-dire  la  frise 
et  la  corniche,  par  un  rafifinement  peu  habituel  aux  Italiens,  ont  ete  supprimees." 
V Architecture  de  la  Renaissance,  par  Leon  Palustre,  Paris,  Quantin,  p.  72. 


90 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP, 


aisles  have  domical  groined  vaulting  with  transverse  ribs,  and  the 
side  chapels  have  barrel  vaults  with  their  axes  perpendicular  to 
that  of  the  nave.  These  chapels  thus  form  abutments  to  the 
inner  vaulting,  so  that  no  external  buttresses  are  needed.     The 

entire  fabric  is  of  brick,  but  the  details, 
including  the  orders  of  the  interior,  of 
the  west  front,  and  of  the  drum,  are 
wrought  in  stucco.  For  the  interior 
the  architect  has  employed  a  great 
order  of  Doric  pilasters,  a  single  pilas- 
ter on  the  face  of  each  pier,  and  on 
the  sides  of  the  piers,  under  the  aisle 
archivolts,  he  has  placed  pairs  of 
smaller  pilasters.  The  soffits  of  the 
archivolts  are  very  wide,  and  have  each 
a  pair  of  salient  sub-archivolts  cor- 
responding with  the  pilasters.  It  had 
been  common  for  the  architects  of  the 
Roman  Renaissance  to  break  the  en- 
tablature into  ressauts  over  the  columns 
or  pilasters  of  the  orders  when  used 
in  this  way,  as  San  Gallo  had  done  in 
Montepulciano  and  Michael  Angelo  in 
St.  Peter's.  But  the  effect  of  thus 
breaking  the  continuity  of  the  cornice 
line  is  unpleasing,  and  Vignola  has 
avoided  it  here  by  confining  the  ressaut 
to  the  architrave,  frieze,  and  bed-mould- 
ings, leaving  the  corona  of  the  cornice 
unbroken  as  in  Figure  47.  The  great 
piers  of  the  crossing  show  the  influence 
of  St.  Peter's  in  being  splayed,  and 
the  forms  of  the  pendentives  lose  their 
spherical  surfaces  in  being  fitted  to  the 
straight  line  of  the  splay,  as  they  do 
in  St.  Peter's.  The  design  of  the  fagade 
expresses  with  unusual  truthfulness  the  divisions  of  the  interior,*' 
which  are  marked  by  pilasters  like  those  of  the  great  order 
within,  and  by  an  arch  coinciding  with  the  curve  of  the 
vaulting. 


Fig.    47.  —  Order   of   Santa 
Maria  degli  Angeli. 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


91 


The  Gesu  in  Rome,  another  large  church  by  Vignola,  and 
built  at  about  the  same  time  as  Santa  Maria  degli  Angeli,  is  a 


Fig.  48.  —  Plan  of  the  Gesu. 


variation  of  the  same  scheme,  and  shows  in  a  more  marked 
degree  the  influence  of  St.  Peter's.  A  plan  of  this  building,  the 
intended  facade  which  Vignola  did  not  live  to  construct,  and  the 


92  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

existing  facade  by  Jacomo  della  Porta  are  given  in  the  adden- 
dum to  the  edition  of  the  architect's  book  on  the  Five  Orders 
published  in  1617  already  referred  to  (p.  84),  and  are  repro- 
duced in  Figures  48,  49,  and  50.  The  aisles  are  omitted  here  so 
that  the  side  chapels,  which  communicate  with  each  other  by  nar- 
row openings  in  the  dividing  walls,  open  directly  out  of  the  nave. 
The  transept  is  short,  and  extends  on  either  side  beyond  the 
nave  only  by  the  thickness  of  its  walls.  An  elevated  dome  on 
pendentives,  circular  on  plan  within  and  octagonal  on  the  out- 
side, rises  over  the  crossing,  and  barrel  vaults  cover  the  nave 
and  transept  arms.  The  side  chapels  are  vaulted,  with  small 
domes  on  pendentives,  except  those  in  the  angles  of  the  cross- 
ing, which  do  not  require  pendentives  because  their  supports 
are  shaped  to  the  circular  form  as  shown  in  the  plan.  Figure  48. 
These  supports  are  made  heavier  than  the  others  in  order  to 
strengthen  the  crossing  piers,  which,  in  consequence  of  this 
reenforcement,  do  not  need  to  advance  so  far  into  the  space 
under  the  great  dome  as  they  otherwise  would.  In  Santa  Maria 
degli  Angeli  the  aisles  prevent  this  treatment,  and  the  crossing 
piers  extend  far  into  the  nave  and  narrow  the  spans  of  the 
crossing  arches. 

The  scheme  of  the  interior  of  the  Gesu  is  a  close  reproduc- 
tion of  that  of  St.  Peter's,  though  the  great  pilasters  are  of  the 
composite,  instead  of  the  Corinthian,  order,  and  other  minor 
differences  are  noticeable.  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the 
entablature  has  no  ressauts  except  at  the  crossing,  and  the 
vaulting  is  raised  upon  an  attic,  so  that  no  part  of  it  is  hidden 
from  view  by  the  cornice  of  the  entablature,  as  it  is  in  St.  Peter's. 
It  is  also  noticeable  that,  while  capricious  in  the  use  of  elements 
derived  from  the  antique,  Vignola  in  his  church  architecture 
eliminates  mediaeval  forms  more  completely  than  most  archi- 
tects of  his  time.  Where  in  St.  Peter's,  for  instance,  the  apses 
have  celled  vaults  on  converging  ribs,  he  employs  the  plain  half- 
dome  of  Roman  antiquity. 

Vignola's  design  for  the  facade  (Fig.  49)  presents  the 
familiar  features  of  his  style  as  already  embodied  in  the  earlier 
fa9ade  of  St.  Andrea,  but  with  additional  infractions  of  pro- 
priety, as  well  as  of  classic  form  in  its  more  elaborate  details. 
This  facade  corresponds  in  outline  with  the  form  of  the  build- 
ing, except  for  the  podium  of  the  upper  story  (which  contradicts 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


93 


the  roof  lines  of  the  side  chapels),  and  the  abutting  walls  of 
curved  outhne  over  the  side  compartments.  The  chief  aberrations 
of  detail  are  the  broken  pediments  of  the  doors  and  windows,  and 


Fig.  49.  —  Facade  of  the  Gesu,  Vignola. 


the  barbaric  scrollwork  and  hermae,  the  use  of  which  this  archi- 
tect did  much  to  establish.  How  far  the  barbarism  of  breaking 
the  pediment  was  an  independent  freak  of  the  Renaissance  I 


94 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


do  not  know.     Instances  of  somewhat  similar  treatment  occur 
in  the  Roman  architecture  of  Syria,  as  in  Baalbek  (Fig.   51), 


FtfffuiM ie\ Ciefu  come  al prefentcfi^rouafnttadalacomo  delldPotiU. 


Fig.  50.  —  Fa9ade  of  the  Gesu,  Delia  Porta. 

where  the  middle  part  of  the  pediment  is  in  retreat  of  the  rest, 
so  that  the  ends  form  ressauts.     Of  the  complete  removal  of  a 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


95 


Fig.  51.  —  Pediment  of  Baalbek. 


part  of  the  cornice  I  know  no  instance  in  the  Roman  archi- 
tecture of  antiquity.  To  this,  however,  the  architects  of  the 
later  Renaissance  were,  in  their  desire  for  novelty  of  design, 
led.  But  the  cornice 
of  a  pediment  is,  like 
the  roof  of  an  entire 
building,  suggestive  of 
shelter  for  the  parts 
below.  The  actual 
necessity  for  such 
shelter  may  be  slight, 
but  any  justification 
which  the  raking  cor- 
nice has  must  be  for 
expression,  if  nothing  more,  of  a  sheltering  roof  to  what  it 
surmounts  (unless  we  are  to  assume  that  architectural  design 
is  a  matter  of  purely  fanciful  composition  of  lines  with  no 
structural  meaning  or  expression).  To  cut  a  piece  out  of  the 
middle  of  it  is  an  architectural  solecism. 

The  actual  fagade  by  Delia  Porta  (Fig.  50)  follows  the  main 
lines  of  Vignola's  design,  but  the  details  are  much  altered.  The 
podium  of  the  upper  story  is  raised  in  height,  reversed  consoles 
are  substituted  for  the  plain  curved  abutments  of  Vignola,  and 
the  raking  cornices  of  the  small  pediments  are  made  whole. 
But  other  aberrations  take  the  place  of  those  which  are  elimi- 
nated, as  that  of  placing  one  pediment  within  another  over  the 
central  portal,  and  the  ugly  shapes  and  framings  of  the  tablets 
and  niches  that  break  the  wall  surfaces.  Delia  Porta  had 
acquired  these  habits  of  design  from  his  master,  Vignola,  and 
how  far  Vignola  himself  could  go  in  such  monstrosities  is  shown 
in  some  of  the  figures  of  his  book  already  spoken  of.  Figure  52 
from  this  book  affords  an  instance. 

If  Vignola  did  much  to  make  authoritative  the  later  ideas  of 
the  sixteenth  century  as  to  the  principles  of  ancient  art  and 
their  application  to  modern  uses,  Palladio  did  even  more.  By 
the  example  of  his  numerous  architectural  works,  as  well  as  by 
his  writings,  the  influence  on  modern  art  of  this  famous  neo- 
classicist  has  been  greater  than  that  of  any  other  architect  of 
the  Renaissance,  so  that  we  have,  in  the  principal  countries  of 
Europe,  a  style  of  architecture  which  is  known  as  Palladian. 


96 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


Palladio  was  the  first  architect  of  the  Renaissance  who  was  not 
at  any  time  either  a  painter  or  a  sculptor.  He  begins  his  well- 
known  book  1  as  follows  :  "  Guided  by  natural  inclination,  I  began 
in  my  earliest  years  to  devote  myself  to  the  study  of  architec- 


FiG.  52.  —  Tablet  from  Vignola. 

ture,  and  having  been  always  of  the  opinion  that  the  ancient 
Romans  were  in  building,  as  in  many  other  things,  far  in  ad- 
vance of  all  those  who  came  after  them,  I  took  for  my  master 
and  guide  Vitruvius,  who  is  the  only  ancient  writer  on  this  art, 

^  Quatro  libri  delP  Architeitura  di  Andrea  Palladio,  Venice,  1 581. 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


97 


and  I  set  myself  to  the  investigation  of  the  remains  of  the  an- 
cient edifices  which,  injured  by  time  and  the  violence  of  bar- 
barians, are  still  extant.  And  finding  them  much  more  worthy 
of  attention  than  I  at  first  thought,  I  began  with  great  diligence 
to  measure  most  minutely  every  part  of  them.  I  became  so 
ardent  an  investigator,  not  having  known  with  what  judgment 
and  fine  proportion  they  had  been  wrought,  that  not  once  only, 
but  many  times,  I  visited  different  parts  of  Italy  and  elsewhere, 
in  order  to  understand  and  delineate  them  completely.  And 
seeing  how  far  the  common  manner  of  building  differs  from 
what  I  have  observed  in  the  ancient  edifices,  and  read  in  Vitru- 
vius,  and  in  Leon  Batista  Alberti,  and  in  other  excellent  writers 
since  Vitruvius,  and  from  that  new  manner  which  I  have  prac- 
tised with  much  satisfaction,  and  which  has  been  praised  by 
those  who  profited  by  my  work,  it  has  seemed  to  me  right,  since 
man  is  not  born  for  himself  alone,  but  also  to  be  useful  to  others, 
to  publish  the  drawings  of  these  edifices,  which  at  the  cost  of 
much  time  and  peril  I  have  gathered ;  and  to  state  briefly  that 
which  has  seemed  to  me  most  worthy  of  consideration  in  them, 
together  with  those  rules  which  I  have  observed,  to  the  end 
that  those  who  shall  read  my  book  may  profit  by  such  good  as 
may  be  in  it,  and  supply  that  which  may  be  wanting  (for  much, 
perhaps,  may  be)  so  that,  little  by  Httle,  we  may  correct  the 
strange  abuses,  the  barbarous  inventions,  avoid  the  superfluous 
cost,  and  (what  is  more  important)  the  various  and  continued 
deterioration  which  we  see  in  so  many  buildings." 

The  implicit  confidence  of  the  neo-classicists  in  the  art  of 
Roman  antiquity  as  the  embodiment  of  all  true  principles  of 
architectural  design,  and  their  unquestioning  behef  that  medi- 
aeval art  was  wholly  false  in  principle  and  barbaric  in  character, 
have  seldom  been  more  naively  expressed. 

Of  church  architecture  by  Palladio  we  have  two  important 
buildings,  San  Giorgio  Maggiore  and  the  Redentore,  both  in 
Venice.  The  first  of  these  stands  on  the  island  of  San  Giorgio, 
opposite  the  Piazzetta,  and  is  a  characteristic  Palladian  design, 
though  some  parts  of  the  west  front  may  have  been  added 
after  the  architect's  death.  This  church  is  cruciform,  and  has 
barrel  vaulting  with  interpenetrations  for  light,  and  a  dome  on 
pendentives  over  the  crossing.  The  piers  are  heavy,  with  a 
single  engaged  column  of  the  composite  order,  raised  on  a  high 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


pedestal,  against  each  one,  except  at  the  crossing,  where  the 
columns  are  coupled  with  pilasters,  while  the  wide  archivolts 
rest  on  pairs  of  smaller  pilasters  of  the  Corinthian  order,  with- 
out pedestals  (Fig.  53).    Both  columns  and  pilasters  have  strong 

entasis,  and  the 
frieze  of  the  entab- 
lature is  rounded 
in  profile.  In  rais- 
ing the  great  order 
on  pedestals  Pal- 
ladio  conformed 
more  closely  to  an- 
cient Roman  prac- 
tice than  Michael 
Angelo  and  Vig- 
nola  had  done ; 
but  the  pedestals 
have  a  clumsy 
effect  thus  ranged 
along  the  nave,  and 
their  sharp  angles 
are  in  the  way  of 
moving  crowds  of 
people.  It  is  no- 
ticeable, too,  that 
Palladio  has  intro- 
duced complete 
orders  under  the 
archivolts,  giving 
an  entablature  to 
each  pair  of  small 
pilasters.  The  en- 
tablature had  be- 
fore been  omitted 
in  this  situation. 
The  whole  scheme 
shows  in  a  marked  degree  how  inappropriate  is  the  use  of  classic 
orders  in  a  church  interior.  The  application  of  such  orders  to  a 
building  with  aisles  and  a  high  nave  obliges  the  designer  to  make 
awkward    combinations,   and    to  violate   true   classic  usage   in 


Fig.  53. — Orders  of  San  Giorgio. 


THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE 


99 


manifold  ways,  as  we  have  already  abundantly  seen.  He  must 
associate  large  and  small  orders,  and  give  them  relationships 
and  adjustments  that  belong  to  mediaeval,  rather  than  to  classic, 
composition.  The  fagade  of  this  building  (Fig.  54)  has  the 
merit  of  conforming  in  outline  to  the  shape  of  the  nave  and 
aisles.     It  is  the  outhne  of  the  primitive  Christian  Roman  basil- 


FlG.  54.  —  Facade  of  San  Giorgio. 


ica  without  any  disguises  in  the  way  of  reversed  consoles  over 
the  aisle  compartments,  or  divisions  contradicting  those  of  the 
interior.  Instead  of  the  superimposed  orders  of  Vignola's  west 
fronts,  Palladio  has  here,  in  the  nave  compartment,  one  great 
order  of  engaged  columns,  on  high  pedestals,  rising  through 
the  entablature  of  a  small  order  of  pilasters,  which  is  carried 
across  the  whole  front,  reaching  to  the  height  of  the  aisles. 
The  total  scheme  gives  a  suggestion  of  mediaeval  organic  com- 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


position,  but  has  no  real  organic  character  pertaining  to  the 
building. 

In  the  facade  of  San  Francesco  della  Vigna,  also  in  Venice, 
and  by  the  same  architect,  the  design  of  San  Giorgio  is  repeated, 
with  some  notable  changes  in  detail.  In  this  case  the  small 
order,  as  well  as  the  larger  one,  consists  of  columns,  except  that 
on  each  angle  a  pilaster  takes  the  place  of  a  column,  and  both 
orders  rise  from  the  same  level,  the  smaller  one  resting  on  a 
continuous  podium,  and  the  larger  one  on  pedestals  which  are 
ressauts  of  the  podium.     The  entablature  of  the  small  order  is 


Fig.  55. — The  Redentore,  Venice. 


here  not  continuous,  but  is  broken  by  the  nave  compartment, 
though  a  fragment  of  it  is  inserted  in  the  central  bay  of  this 
compartment  over  the  small  columns  that  flank  the  portal. 

The  scheme  of  the  Redentore  differs  from  that  of  San 
Giorgio.  It  has  no  transept  and  no  aisles,  but  in  the  place 
of  aisles  a  series  of  side  chapels.  A  square  area  in  front  of 
the  sanctuary  is  covered  with  a  dome  on  pendentives,  while  the 
nave  has  a  barrel  vault,  and  the  side  chapels  have  barrel  vaults 
with  their  axes  perpendicular  to  the  axis  of  the  nave.  From  the 
dividing  walls  of  these  chapels  solid  abutments  in  pairs  are  car- 
ried up  through  the  lean-to  roofs  over  the  chapels  to  meet  the 
thrusts  of  the  nave  vaulting,  as  shown  in  the  general  view  of 
the  exterior  (Fig.  55).  The  plan  of  the  east  end  is  peculiar. 
A  round  apse  opens  out  of  the  north  and  south  sides  of  the 


V  THE  ROMAN  RENAISSANCE  loi 

square  covered  by  the  dome,  and  a  colonnade  on  a  curved  plan 
forming  the  sanctuary  bounds  this  square  area  on  the  east 
side.  Beyond  this  is  an  oblong  enclosure  the  eastern  wall  of 
which  is  on  a  curved  plan,  and  the  sanctuary  is  flanked  by 
small  towers.  The  interior  has  a  great  order  of  Corinthian 
columns,  one  against  each  pier,  resting  directly  on  the  pave- 
ment, and  the  small  pilasters  under  the  archivolts  carry  entabla- 
tures which  extend  to  the  outer  wall  and  from  them  the  barrel 
vaults  of  the  chapels  spring.  The  entablature  of  the  great 
order  is  not  set  in  the  wall  and  broken  by  ressauts  to  cover  the 
columns,  as  in  San  Giorgio  ;  but  is  carried  by  the  columns,  and 
thus  overhangs  the  wall  with  a  supporting  corbel  in  the  middle 
of  each  intercolumniation  which  forms  a  keystone  to  the  arch 
beneath.  The  fa9ade  of  the  Redentore  is  a  variation  of  that  of 
San  Giorgio  with  the  pedestals  omitted  from  the  great  order,  as 
in  the  interior,  and  it  has  an  attic  behind  the  pediment  like  that 
of  Vignola's  small  church  of  St.  Andrea  at  Rome.  Such  is  the 
nature  of  Palladian  church  architecture.  We  shall  see  more  of 
Palladio's  art  when  we  come  to  the  consideration  of  the  later 
civil  and  domestic  architecture  of  the  Renaissance. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  multiply  examples  of  the  church  archi- 
tecture of  the  Roman  Renaissance,  i.e.  that  architecture  which 
derived  its  character  primarily  from  the  influences  that  were 
active  in  Rome  from  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century. 
For  while  the  churches  of  this  style  differ  considerably  one 
from  another  in  details,  they  agree  essentially  in  architectural 
treatment  growing  out  of  a  closer  contact  with  ancient  monu- 
ments, though  with  no  strict  conformity  to  them.  Descriptions 
of  minor  differences  in  the  forms  of  such  buildings,  and  in  the 
composition  of  their  ornamental  details,  are  tedious,  and  enough 
of  them  have  now  been  given.  We  may,  therefore,  in  the  next 
chapter,  pass  on  to  the  consideration  of  the  palace  architecture 
of  the  Renaissance. 


CHAPTER  VI 

PALACE  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  FLORENTINE  RENAISSANCE 

While  it  was  in  church  edifices  that  the  neo-classic  ideas  in 
architecture  were  first  embodied,  it  was  in  vast  palatial  houses, 
that  they  were  most  extensively  carried  out.  Early  in  the 
fifteenth  century  luxurious  living  began  to  prevail  among  the 
upper  classes  of  society,  and  sumptuous  private  dwellings  on 
an  unprecedented  scale  were  now  erected  in  Florence.  Magnifi- 
cent palaces  had,  indeed,  been  built  in  the  later  Middle  Ages 
which  were  among  the  chief  ornaments  of  the  mediaeval  towns ; 
but  those  were  civic  monuments  expressive  of  the  communal 
spirit  and  artistic  culture  of  their  time.  Such  buildings  as  the 
Palazzo  Vecchio  in  Florence,  the  Palazzo  Pubblico  of  Siena, 
the  Ducal  Palace  of  Venice,  and  many  others  were  the  material 
manifestation  of  a  state  of  municipal  pride,  and  popular  love  of 
beauty  and  propriety  in  public  monuments.  Upon  these  build- 
ings the  best  craftsmanship  was  lavished,  while  the  dwellings 
of  the  most  wealthy  citizens  were  modest  in  scale,  though  often 
beautiful  in  design. 

A  fine  example  of  an  unostentatious,  though  dignified,  house 
of  a  Florentine  Patrician  of  the  thirteenth  century  still  extant 
is  the  Palazzo  Mozzi.  Its  broad  walled  front  of  two  stories  over 
a  high  basement,  with  narrow  string  courses  of  simple  profile 
and  moderate  projection,  its  well-faced  and  finely  jointed 
masonry,  and  its  plain  window  openings  of  the  characteristic 
mediaeval  Florentine  form  in  which  the  extrados  is  pointed 
while  the  intrados  is  round  (Fig.  56),  is  a  model  of  architectural 
simplicity,  while  it  expresses  the  superior  social  station  of  its 
inmates.  A  few  smaller  houses  of  similar  character  as  to 
quietness  and  simplicity  of  design,  many  of  them  suited  to 
the  needs  of  humbler  citizens,  have  been  preserved  in  some  of 
the  ItaUan  towns.  A  few  interesting  examples  of  these  may  be 
found  in  Perugia.     They  have  plain  stone  fronts,  with  simple 


Plate  iV 


Plorence 


CHAP.  VI 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


103 


string  courses  marking  off  the  stories,  and  windows  in  some 
cases  wholly  round  arched,  in  others  having  the  extrados  pointed 
with  an  ogee  curve  (Fig.  57). 

But  early  in  the  fifteenth  century  vast  structures  for  private 
use  began  to  arise  which  rivalled  in  scale,  and  in  costly  splen- 
dour, the  great  civic  monuments  of  the  former  time.  The  first 
of  these  larger  palaces  in  Florence  is  the  one  now  known  as 
the  Riccardi,  designed  by  the  architect  Michelozzi  for  Cosimo 
de'  Medici  in  1430.  It  is  a  princely  edifice,  and  though 
comparatively  plain  in  general  aspect,  it  is  in  many  ways  supe- 
rior in  architectural  character  to  all  of  those  which  followed  it. 
Like  other  buildings  of  its  class  it  is  in  plan  a  survival  of  the 
ancient  Roman  house,  having  the  form  of  a  rectangle  enclosing 
an  open  court.     In  elevation  (Plate  IV)  it  has  two  stories  over 


J     ...-^-.  1  .-■„,,- 

■  ,• 

.  1   '  1   /--;   1  "1            //.-I— ^       •   1     1 

-UX"  ■     X_ 

" 

M  ••  ^  1 

y\-  \      ' 

-  — , 

1 

x\'  r   AX 

\    /    .  /^sJ — 

1 

1 

r^ 

3^ 

I  •  l"\  /\- 

1 

^ 

>\-t 

-  ~\ 

1      * 

^•-•'V 

: 

. 

^-.' 

Fig.  56, 


Fig.  57. 


a  high  basement,  and  is  grandly  simple  in  design,  and  fine  in  its 
proportions.  In  buildings  of  this  class  there  is  no  peculiar  in- 
ternal system  which  requires  attention  before  the  outside  can  be 
understood.  The  apartments  have  generally  flat  wooden  ceilings, 
and  where  vaulting  occurs,  as  usually  in  the  basement  and  some- 
times in  the  upper  stories,  it  is  of  a  kind  that  calls  for  no  but- 
tresses against  the  wall,  the  thrusts  being  met  by  the  thickness  of 
the  walls,  and  by  the  weight  of  the  upper  stories.  The  facades  of 
the  Riccardi  have  no  engaged  orders,  but  the  great  cornice  has 
classic  profiling,  and  its  bed  mouldings  have  dentils  and  other 
classic  details,  while  modillions  of  semi-classic  form  support  the 
corona.  The  window  openings  are  of  thoroughly  mediaeval 
character  in  their  larger  features,  and  are  each  composed  of 
a  round  arch  embracing  two  smaller  arches  with  a  central  shaft 
and  jamb  shafts,  but  the  shafts  have  the  tapering  form  with 


I04  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

entasis,  and  the  congi^  of  classic  design.  The  capitals  are  of 
nondescript  form,  with  a  channelled  bell,  an  ovolo  with  egg  and 
dart  ornament,  reversed  Corinthianesque  leafage  depending  from 
its  angles,  and  a  Corinthian  abacus  in  each.  The  openings  are 
uniform  in  each  story,  and  their  archivolts  are  treated  in  the 
mediaeval  Italian  manner,  the  extrados  being  struck  from  a 
higher  centre  than  the  intrados.  The  graduated  heights  of 
the  stories,  and  the  varied  treatment  of  the  wall  surfaces  by 
rough-faced  rustication  in  the  basement,  smooth-faced  rustica- 
tion in  the  principal  story,  and  smooth  close-jointed  masonry 
in  the  top  story,  add  much  to  the  beauty  of  this  finest  of  early 
Renaissance  palaces.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  here,  as  in 
the  Italian  domestic  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  generally, 
the  roof  is  not  visible  in  a  near  view  of  the  building,  and  no 
dormers  or  chimney-stacks  appear.  The  conditions  of  climate 
did  not  call  for  a  high-pitched  roof,  nor  for  any  of  those  fea- 
tures that  are  naturally  developed  in  the  architecture  of  more 
northern  countries.  The  general  outline  of  the  edifice  is  thus 
severely  simple,  and  its  agreeable  effect  is  due  to  its  fine  pro- 
portions and  arrangement  of  parts.  It_is_noticeable,  too,  that_ 
the  reveals_are^^hallow^n  the  outside,  in  marked  contrast  to 
the  deep  reveals  of  the  later  Renaissance  architecture.  This 
is  not  only  conducive  to  quietness  of  effect,  but  it  has  the  ad- 
vantage of  giving  to  the  interior  the  maximum  of  light  —  since 
the  farther  out  the  glass  is  placed  the  less  will  be  the  shadow 
thrown  upon  it,  while  the  internal  reveal,  especially  when  it  is 
splayed,  reflects  light  into  the  interior. 

The  interior  court  of  the  Renaissance  palace  has  a  vaulted 
arcade  on  each  of  its  four  sides  beneath  the  overhanging  upper 
stories.  These  arcades  are,  in  the  Riccardi  (Fig.  58),  supported 
on  columns  of  classic  form  with  capitals  of  a  composite  type,  but 
of  no  great  beauty.  The  arches  spring  directly  from  these  capi- 
tals, and  have  classic  profiles,  while  two  string  courses,  with  an 
interval  forming  a  semblance  of  a  frieze,  give  the  effect  of  an 
entablature  passing  over  the  crowns  of  the  arches. 
H^  The  spacious  apartments  of  these  early  Florentine  palaces 
are  generally  fine  in  their  proportions  and  simple  in  their  archi- 
tectural treatment.  They  are,  however,  rarely  well  lighted. 
The  ceilings  are  at  a  great  height  above  the  comparatively  low 
windows,  and  the  windows  are  disposed  for  external  effect,  rather 


VI 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


los 


than  for  convenience  within.     Thus  while  these  apartments  are^ 

stately,  they  arerarely  adapted  to  cheerful  indoor  life,  and  in 

a  northern  climate  they  would  be  intolerably  gloomy.     When 

used,  as  they  now  often  are,   as  galleries  for  the   display  of 

works  of  art,  they  do  not  serve  well,  very  small  portions  of 

their     vast     wall 

spaces  being  well 

lighted,   and    the 

disposition  of  the 

openings    often 

such  as  to  produce 

emb  ar  rassing 

cross    lights    and 

reflections. 

Vasari  tells  us 
that  "after  Bru- 
nelleschi,  Miche- 
lozzi  was  held  to 
be  the  most  con- 
sistent architect 
of  his  time,  and 
the  one  who  with 
best  judgment 
planned  either 
palaces,  monas- 
teries or  houses." 
And  concerning 
the  Riccardi  he 
adds,  "  All  the 
more  praise  is 
due  him  since 
this  was  the  first 
palace  in  Flor- 
ence built  in  the 
modern  manner,  and  which  has  a  disposition  of  apartments 
both  useful  and  beautiful."  ^  He  does  not  explain  in  what 
the  superior  planning  of  the  Riccardi  consists,  and  it  is  doubtful 
whether  these  remarks  were  based  on  any  definite  idea.  But 
however  this  may  be,  the   building  is   indeed   a   stately   and 

1  Le  Vile,  etc.,  vol.  2,  pp.  432-433. 


Fig.  58.  — Court  of  the  Riccardi. 


io6  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

magnificent  one,  of  quiet  aspect,  and  for  the  most  part  free  from 
meaningless  features. 

Hardly  any  other  one  of  the  Florentine  palaces  of  the 
Renaissance  equals  the  Riccardi  in  beauty  and  dignity.  That 
part  of  the  Pitti  which  was  begun  by  Brunelleschi  in  1435, 
though  equally  free  from  meaningless  features,  is  almost  too 
bald  to  be  called  an  architectural  design.  Each  story  of  its 
long  facade  is  as  monotonous  as  the  Claudian  aqueduct  which 
it  closely  resembles. 

The  front  of  the  small  palace  called  the  Strozzino  is  in  the 
style  of  the  Riccardi,  and  is  attributed  to  the  same  architect.  It 
has  but  one  story  above  the  high  basement,  and  the  treatment 
is  even  more  mediaeval  in  character,  the  window  arches  having 
the  pointed  form. 

The  Palazzo  Strozzi,  begun  in  1489  by  Benedetto  da  Majano, 
follows  the  same  general  scheme  as  the  Riccardi,  but  is  less  ad- 
mirable in  its  proportions.  Vasari  tells  us  that  Majano  carried 
the  exterior  almost  to  completion,  but  that  the  court  and  the 
great  cornice  were  the  work  of  Simione  Pollaiuolo,  called 
II  Cronaca.  This  cornice,  he  says,  was  copied  from  an  ancient 
model  in  Rome  which  the  architect  had  drawn  and  measured 
with  great  exactness,  but  he  had  here  enlarged  the  scale  to  suit 
the  proportions  of  the  building.^  I  think  it  may  be  said  that 
he  enlarged  it  too  much,  and  that,  in  common  with  the  cornices 
of  most  of  these  Renaissance  palaces,  it  is  too  heavy.  The 
Strozzi,  more  than  any  other  of  the  palatial  houses  of  its  time, 
has  the  fortress-like  character  which  indicates  the  turbulent 
condition  of  Florence  in  the  fifteenth  century.  The  vast  base- 
ment of  ponderous  masonry,  with  no  window  openings  near  the 
ground,  gives  a  gloomy  and  forbidding  aspect  to  the  front,  and 
marks  a  survival  of  the  savage  habits  of  feudal  life  in  this 
epoch  of  advanced  Italian  civilization  and  culture. 

The  Palazzo  Pazzi,  now  known  as  the  Quaratesi,  is  attributed 
to  Brunelleschi,  and.  has  the  marks  of  his  style  in  the  details  of 
the  windows.  It  has  the  same  general  scheme  of  design  as  the 
foregoing  houses,  and  its  stories  are  proportioned  with  the  same 
pleasing  gradation  in  their  heights  that  we  have  noticed  in  the 
Riccardi ;  but  the  wall  surfaces  are  different,  being  uniformly 
overlaid  with  stucco.     A  series  of  small  circular  openings,  with 

1  op.  cit.,  vol.  4,  p.  444. 


VI  PALACE  ARCHITECTURE  107 

mouldings  over  the  windows  of  the  topmost  full  story,  resem- 
bling those  of  the  drum  of  the  Pazzi  chapel,  seem  to  give  further 
evidence  of  Brunelleschi's  hand.  Still  another  building  in  this 
style,  though  of  even  plainer  external  character,  having  small 
undivided  openings,  is  the  Palazzo  Gondi,  designed  by  Guiliano 
da  San  Gallo  toward  the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century.  The 
arcades  of  the  court  of  the  Gondi,  have  Corinthian  columns  of 
great  elegance,  and  the  arches  have  ornamental  keystones. 

Another  type  of  Florentine  palace  of  the  early  Renaissance 
is  exemplified  in  the  Palazzo  Guardagni,  attributed  to  Simone 
Pallaiuolo.  It  has  an  open  loggia  at  the  top,  and  the  portals 
and  windows  have  the  round  arched  form  with  the  extrados 
pointed.  This  is  a  thoroughly  reasonable  and  appropriate 
Italian  style  of  domestic  building,  and  if  it  had  been  consistently 
adhered  to,  without  any  admixture  of  the  classic  elements  that 
were  soon  introduced,  the  domestic  architecture  of  Florence  in 
the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  might  have  merited  our 
unqualified  admiration.  On  the  simple  and  appropriate  scheme 
of  the  Palazzo  Guardagni  there  was  opportunity  for  such  varia- 
tions of  disposition,  proportion,  and  details  as  utility  and  taste 
might  call  for,  without  any  resort  to  neo-classic  elements. 

The  foregoing  buildings,  though  larger  and  more  elegant 
than  the  private  houses  of  the  Middle  Ages,  are  still  in  their 
main  features  largely  mediaeval  in  character.  But  before  the 
later  buildings  of  this  class  were  erected,  another  phase  of  design 
in  palatial  architecture  arose  in  which  the  spirit  of  the  Renais- 
sance is  more  manifest  in  the  application  of  the  classic  orders 
>^  to  the  walls  of  the  facades.  This  application,  as  is  well  known, 
occurs  first  in  the  Palazzo  Rucellai,  designed  by  the  architect 
Alberti  and  built  just  after  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century. 
We  have  already  (pp.  35-42)  seen  something  of  Alberti's  use  of 
classic  orders  in  church  architecture,  and  we  have  now  to  con- 
sider further  the  influences  which  were  guiding  the  public  taste 
as  they  are  reflected  in  the  works  of  the  man  who  on  the  whole 
did  most  at  this  early  epoch  to  establish  the  new  architectural 
ideas.  Alberti  was  a  scholar  and  a  man  of  high  social  station. 
Like  most  men  of  culture  in  Florence  he  had  a  taste  for  the  fine 
arts,  but,  as  Vasari  tells  us,  he  "applied  himself  not  only  to 
discover  the  principles  and  the  proportions  of  antiquity,  but  also, 
being  naturally  so  inclined,  much  more  to  writing  than  to  prac- 


io8 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


tice."  ^     The   moving    purpose   with   him   was   thus   primarily 
archaeological  and  literary,  rather  than  artistic. 

The  Rucellai  is  in  form  substantially  like  the  Riccardi  and 
other  buildings  of  its  class,  but  in  place  of  the  plain  wall  sur- 


FiG.  59.  —  Facade  of  the  Rucellai. 


faces  which  are  appropriate  for  a  building  that  has  no  struc- 
tural framework,  we  have  an  order  of  classic  pilasters  dividing 
the  face  of  each  story  into  bays  answering  to  nothing  in  the 
real  system  of  construction  (Fig.  59).  We  thus  have  here  in 
1  Op.  ciL,  vol,  2,  p.  537. 


VI  PALACE  ARCHITECTURE  109 

domestic  architecture  an  instance  of  that  false  use  of  the  orders 
which  in  church  architecture  was  first  introduced  in  the  chapel 
of  the  Pazzi.  Alberti's  classic  tendencies  are  here  shown  fur- 
ther in  the  introduction  of  a  diminutive  entablature  passing 
through  the  smaller  arches  of  the  windows,  and  these  arches 
are  merely  cut  in  relief  on  a  solid  tympanum  (Fig.  59).  It  is 
worthy  of  notice,  too,  that  the  rustication  of  the  masonry  of 
this  facade  does  not  mark  the  true  joints.  The  blocks  of  stone 
are  in  many  cases  much  larger  than  they  appear,  channels  being 
cut  upon  them  to  simulate  joints.  The  arch  of  one  window, 
for  instance,  which  by  the  rustication  would  appear  to  be  made 
up  of  fourteen  voussoirs,  has  in  reaUty  only  three.  The  same 
lack  of  conformity  of  the  simulated  jointing  with  the  true 
masonry  joints  is  noticeable  also  in  many  parts  of  the  facade  of 
the  Riccardi,  and  I  know  not  how  general  this  treatment  may 
be  in  the  architecture  of  the  Renaissance.^ 

The  initiative  thus  given  by  Alberti  was  not  at  once  uni- 
versally followed.  The  orders  did  not  come  into  general  use 
in  the  facades  of  domestic  architecture  until  the  period  of  the 
later  Renaissance.  The  most  important  Florentine  palaces  of 
the  latter  part  of  the  fifteenth  century  have,  as  we  have  seen 
in  the  Strozzi,  no  classic  orders.  The  classic  elements  of  these 
buildings  are  confined  to  details  such  as  the  profiling  of  cornices, 
and  the  introduction  of  dentils  and  other  kindred  ornaments, 
and  to  the  capitals  of  court  arcades. 

Early  in.  the  sixteenth  century  a  further  innovation  in  the 
treatment  of  palace  fronts  was  made  in  Florence  by  the  Archi- 
tect Baccio  d'  Agnolo,  whose  design  for  the  campanile  of  Santo 
Spirito  we  have  already  noticed  (p.  82),  in  the  Palazzo  Bartolini. 
This  consisted  in  framing  the  windows  with  small  orders  crowned 
by  pediments  (Fig.  60).  Milizia  thus  refers  to  this  innovation  : 
"  This  was  the  first  palace  with  windows  adorned  with  frontis- 
pieces and  with  columns  at  the  doorway  carrying  architrave, 
frieze,  and  cornice.  A  novelty,  like  most  others,  at  first  disap- 
proved and  then  idolized.  The  Florentines  all  ridiculed  Baccio 
for  this  new  style  of  architecture,  not  only  with  words,  but  with 
sonnets,  and  with  jesting  devices  attached  to  the  building,  taunt- 

1  I  believe  I  am  correct  in  this.  Photographs  seem  to  show  it  clearly,  but  I 
have  not  verified  this  point  in  the  monuments  themselves. 


no 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


ing  him  with  having  made  a  church  of  a  palace."  ^  For  the  rest, 
though  Baccio  d'  Agnolo  has  not  adorned  the  walls  of  this 
building  with  orders,  he  has  marked  the  stories  with  entabla- 
tures, and  placed  rusticated  pilasters  at  the  angles. 

As  time  went  on  the  spirit  of  display  in  domestic  architec- 
ture increased.  Buildings  like  the  Riccardi  owe  their  admirable 
character  largely  to  their  moderation.     The  well-known  remark 

of  Vasari  ^  that  Cosimo  de' 
Medici  had  rejected  a 
scheme  for  that  building 
which  had  been  prepared 
by  Brunelleschi  on  the 
ground  that  so  sumptuous 
a  dwelling  for  a  private 
citizen  might  excite  envy, 
indicates  the  more  modest 
feeling  and  sense  of  fitness, 
which  as  yet  held  in  check 
the  spirit  of  ostentation. 
But  the  boast  of  Filippo 
Strozzi  that  he  would  make 
his  great  palace  excel  all 
others  in  magnificence  be- 
trays the  ambition  that 
governed  the  later  builders 
of  the  great  houses  of  the 
Renaissance. 

By  the  beginning  of  the 
sixteenth  century  the  vigour 
of  the  Florentine  Republic  was  spent,  and  its  artistic  ascendency 
was  declining.  Lorenzo  de'  Medici  had  died,  and  the  chief  seat 
of  artistic  activity  was,  as  we  have  already  seen,  transferred  to 
Rome  where  the  conditions  were  very  different  from  what  they 
had  been  in  Florence  during  the  earlier  time.  Ideals  and  aspira- 
tions were  further  changed,  and  the  quest  of  material  splendour 
was  more  than  ever  stimulated  under  the  mundane  ambitions  of 
a  luxurious  and  profligate  society.  Thus  it  was  that  in  connec- 
tion with  the  later  neo-classic  church  architecture  already  con- 
sidered there  arose  a  corresponding  movement  in  the  erection 

^  op.  cit.,  vol.  I,  p.  240.  2  i^g  Vite,  etc.,  vol.  2,  p.  433. 


Fig.  60.  —  Window  of  the  Bartolini. 


VI  PALACE  ARCHITECTURE  ill 

of  sumptuous  palatial  houses,  though  still  for  some  time  palatial 
architecture  retained  much  of  the  earlier  moderation  in  design. 
The  great  Roman  houses  of  the  early  part  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury have  a  dignity  and  grandeur  that  go  far  to  redeem  their 
incongruities.  It  was  not,  as  we  shall  see  in  the  next  chapter, 
until  men  like  Sansovino,  Vignola,  and  Palladio  appeared  that 
the  Roman  influences  bore  their  full  fruit. 


CHAPTER  VII 

PALACE    ARCHITECTURE    OF    THE    ROMAN    RENAISSANCE 

Among  the  first  of  the  great  Roman  palatial  houses  of  the 
Renaissance  is  the  so-called  Cancelleria,  which  together  with 
the  Palazzo  Girand  Torlonia  of  similar  design,  has  been 
attributed  to  Bramante.  The  building  is  believed,  however,  to 
have  been  begun  before  Bramante  had  settled  in  Rome,  but  it 
is  not  impossible  that  he  may  have  had  a  hand  in  its  design  and 
construction  at  a  later  time  while  he  was  at  work  on  the  church 
of  St.  Peter.  Some  ground  for  belief  in  his  authorship  of  the 
fa9ade  is  found  in  some  of  its  leading  features  which  resemble, 
on  the  one  hand,  those  which  are  characteristic  of  the  early 
Renaissance  architecture  of  the  north  of  Italy,  where  Bramante 
received  his  early  training,  and  on  the  other,  the  work  of 
Albert!  under  whose  influence  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
he  had  come  while  in  Mantua.  The  north  Italian  features^  are 
the  windows  of  the  principal  story  (Fig.  6i),  which  are  un- 
divided and  flanked  with  pilasters  carrying  archivolts  sur- 
mounted with  cornices  on  panelled  spandrels,  and  the  disks 
in  the  wall  over  the  windows,  while  the  features  bearing  like- 
ness to  the  work  of  Alberti  are  the  orders  of  pilasters  applied 
to  the  walls,  as  in  the  Rucellai  of  Florence.  But  Bramante, 
if  this  be  his  design,  has  gone  a  step  farther  in  conformity  with 
the  Roman  antique  in  introducing  a  podium  beneath  each  order, 
as  in  the  Flavian  Amphitheatre.  He  has  also  extended  Alberti's 
arrangement  of  the  pilasters  of  the  clerestory  of  Santa  Maria 
Novella,  setting  them  in  pairs  across  the  whole  front  instead  of 
spacing  them  equally.  He  thus  established  a  mode  of  treatment 
that  was  afterwards  extensively  followed,  with  man)'^  variations, 
in  palatial  facades.  Among  Renaissance  innovations  in  the  use 
of  the  orders  this  is  one  of  the  most  marked.  In  ancient  Greek 
usage  the  columns  of  an  order  were  equally  spaced,  save  in 

1  Cf.  p.  144. 
112 


CHAP.  VII 


PALACE  ARCHITEC'lURE 


113 


exceptional  cases  where  the  central  intercolumniation  is  con- 
siderably widened  to  give  a  more  ample  passageway,  as  in  the 
Propylaea  at  Athens.  The  Romans,  in  their  triumphal  arches, 
increased  the  width  of  the  central  space,  but  no  other  inequality 
of  spacing  is  common  in  ancient  art. 


Fig.  61. —  Fagade  of  the  Cancelleria,  Rome. 


The  facade  of  the  Cancelleria  has  a  feature  that  is  not  com- 
mon in  Italian  architecture,  that  of  a  slight  advance  of  the  wall 
at  each  end,  so  as  to  form  projecting  bays,  as  in  the  pavilions  of 
the  French  Renaissance  chateaux.  The  salience  of  these  bays 
is  very  slight,  however,  and  is  hardly  noticeable  in  a  general 


114  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

front  view.  The  scheme  of  the  upper  fagade  resembles  that  of 
the  Rucellai  very  strikingly,  save  in  the  points  just  noticed  ;  but 
the  basement  is  different,  having  no  order,  its  rusticated  wall 
being  unbroken  except  by  the  portals,  of  which  there  are  two, 
and  a  series  of  small  arched  window  openings.  Only  one  of 
these  portals  belongs  to  the  original  design.  This  one,  shown 
in  the  illustration,  is  of  stately  magnitude  and  fine  proportions. 
Its  jambs  and  hntel  are  profiled  with  severely  classic  mouldings, 
and  it  is  crowned  with  a  cornice  on  consoles  with  a  frieze 
between  it  and  the  lintel.  It  is  an  ampHfication  of  Alberti's 
portals  in  the  Rucellai,  and  is  of  almost  Greek  purity  of  design, 
though  it  differs  from  a  Greek  portal  in  the  more  pronounced 
character  of  its  cornice,  in  the  introduction  of  the  frieze,  in  the 
greater  development  of  the  consoles,  and  in  its  vertical  jambs, 
which  in  Greek  design  would  incline  inward.  A  comparison 
with  the  portal  of  the  Erechtheum  will  illustrate  the  points  of 
likeness  and  of  difference.  The  other  portal  appears  to  be  an 
interpolation  of  a  later  time.  An  order  of  Doric  columns  fram- 
ing an  arch  is  set  against  a  double  order  of  Doric  pilasters,  the 
whole  supporting  a  balcony,  and  forming  a  scheme  characteris- 
tic of  the  later  Renaissance. 

The  court  of  the  Cancelleria  has  an  arcade  of  two  vaulted 
stories.  These  arcades  support  the  overhanging  upper  story 
and  attic,  both  of  which  are  embraced  by  a  single  order  of  pilas- 
ters not  arranged  in  pairs,  as  in  the  external  facade,  but  evenly 
spaced. 

In  Rome  as  in  Florence  many  of  the  great  palaces  are 
without  engaged  orders  dividing  the  wall  surfaces  into  bays. 
The  Palazzo  Massimi,  for  instance,  the  next  one  of  importance, 
designed  by  Baldassare  Peruzzi,  and  dating  from  the  early  part 
of  the  sixteenth  century,  has  an  order  on  the  basement  story 
only,  while  the  wall  above  is  unbroken  even  by  string  courses. 
In  conformity  with  the  line  of  the  street  on  which  it  stands,  the 
facade  of  the  Massimi  is  curved  on  plan.  A  wide  recessed 
portico  (Fig.  62)  gives  a  reason  for  the  introduction  of  a  free- 
standing Doric  order,  and  in  continuation  of  this  order,  an  order 
of  engaged  Doric  pilasters  is  ranged  along  the  basement  wall 
on  either  side.  Both  columns  and  pilasters  are  here  again 
placed  in  pairs,  the  narrow  intervals  being  narrower  than  in  the 
Cancelleria,  and  in  the  portico  the  interval  on  the  axis,  opposite 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


IIS 


the  portal,  is  wider  than  the  other  wide  ones,  while  at  each  end 
a  column  is  necessarily  paired  with  a  pilaster.  The  plain  wall 
of  the  upper  stories  is  uniformly  rusticated  and  smooth-faced. 
The  windows  of  the  principal  story  are  framed  with  mouldings 
of  quiet  classic  profiling,  have  simple  cornices  on  consoles,  and 
are  ranged  on  a  podium  with  a  ressaut  under  each  window. 


Fig.  62.  —  Portico  of  the  Massitni,  Rome. 


Above  are  two  tiers  of  small  oblong  rectangular  windows  with 
cartouche  frames.  The  details  of  this  facade  have  great  refine- 
ment, and  show  the  influence  of  Alberti.  The  Roman  Doric 
order  of  the  portico  has  much  simple  beauty.  The  entasis  of 
the  columns  is  more  moderate  than  is  common  in  later  Renais- 
sance design,  and  the  light  falls  on  their  rounded  surfaces,  as 
they  stand  relieved  against  the  dark  void  of  the  porch,  with 
admirable  effect.     The  facade  as  a  whole  is  monotonous,  but  it 


ii6  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

has  an   expression  of  architectural  reserve   that   is  worthy  of 
praise. 

The  fagade  of  the  Palazzo  Farnese,  by  Antonio  da  San  Gallo 
the  younger,  the  grandest  of  these  Roman  palaces,  again  has  its 
wall  surfaces  unencumbered  with  orders.  The  basement  is 
comparatively  low,  and  all  three  stories  are  in  effect  of  nearly 
equal  height.  The  walls  are  of  brick  with  rusticated  quoins 
of  stone,  and  a  rusticated  stone  portal  in  relief,  of  the  simple 
early  Florentine  type,  occupies  the  centre  of  the  basement. 
The  quoins  suggest  the  influence  of  the  rusticated  pilasters  on 
the  angles  of  the  Bartolini  palace  in  Florence,  and  San  Gallo  has 
followed  Baccio  d'  Agnolo,  the  architect  of  the  Bartolini,  further 
by  introducing  small  orders  with  pediments  to  frame  the  win- 
dows of  the  upper  stories.  But  for  pilasters  he  has  substituted 
engaged  colonnettes  on  high  pedestals,  and  in  the  principal  story 
has  made  angular  pediments  alternate  with  curved  ones.  This 
mode  of  designing  doors  and  windows  has  since  become  so  com- 
mon that  it  generally  passes  without  question  of  its  propriety. 
It  is,  however,  justifiable  only  on  the  principle,  universally  ac- 
cepted by  the  architects  of  the  Renaissance,  that  structural  mem- 
bers may  be  used  for  ornamental  purposes  without  any  structural 
meaning  or  expression  in  harmony  with  the  character  of  the 
building  to  which  they  are  applied.  But  this  is  a  principle  which 
finds  no  support  in  any  thoroughly  noble  system  of  architecture 
—  Greek,  Byzantine,  or  Gothic.  Structural  members  may  be 
used  properly  enough  with  a  primarily  ornamental  purpose  when 
they  have  a  character  in  keeping  with  the  real  structural  system 
in  which  they  are  used.  The  blind  arcades,  and  shafted  archi- 
volts  of  the  portals,  of  Romanesque  and  Gothic  architecture,  are 
largely  of  this  nature ;  ^  but  to  surround  the  windows  of  a 
walled  structure,  like  the  Farnese,  with  columns  and  entabla- 
tures applied  to  the  surface  of  the  wall,  is  an  architectural 
solecism.  A  further  barbarism  occurs  in  the  windows  of  the 
top  story,  which  are  said  to  have  been  designed  by  Michael 
Angelo,  and  the  fact  that  they  are  like  the  upper  windows  of 
the  church  of  St.  Peter  lends  support  to  the  attribution.  These 
windows  of  the  Farnese  are  arched,  and  the  crowns  of  the 
arches  rise  above  the  capitals  of  the  flanking  colonnettes  so  that 

^  These  ornamental  features  usually  have,  however,  in  Gothic  art  some  real 
structural  function. 


VII 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


117 


an  entablature  resting  on  these  capitals  cannot  pass  over  them. 
Complete  entablatures  are  therefore  omitted,  entablature  blocks 
being  set  upon  the  capitals  to  support  the  raking  cornices  of 
the  pediments  (Fig.  63).  This  makes  a  bad  composition, 
because  the  structural  system  simulated  would  in  reality  be  an 
insecure  one  in  consequence  of  the  absence  of  a  tying  member 
which  the  entablature  should  form  in  such  a  scheme.  The  eye 
instinctively  feels  that  the  pediment  cornices  are  tending  to 
thrust  so  as  to  overthrow  the  supporting  colonnettes.  It  is  true 
that  in  the  windows  of  the  principal  fagade  (the  figure  is  taken 
from  a  window  on  the  side  of  the  building)  the  cornice  of  the 
entablature  block  is 
returned  against  the 
wall  over  the  arch ; 
but  this  is  so  far  in 
retreat,  and  so  incon- 
spicuous, that  it  does 
not  properly  complete 
the  pediment  triangle. 
Precedents  for  many  of 
these  Renaissance 
aberrations  of  design 
may  be  found  in  an- 
cient Roman  art,  and 
this  particular  one  is 
foreshadowed  at  Baal- 
bek, where  in  the  pedi- 
ment already  noticed  (p.  95)  the  entablature,  as  well  as  the 
raking  cornice,  is  broken,  the  middle  part  being  set  back  in  the 
plane  of  the  wall,  and  the  parts  over  the  supporting  pilasters 
forming  ressauts.  But  I  know  of  no  ancient  instance  in 
which  the  entablature  is  completely  removed  between  the 
ressauts,  unless  the  one  figured  by  Serlio  ^  (reproduced  in  Fig. 
64)  be  ancient.  He  does  not  say  that  it  is,  but  he  describes 
it  among  other  things  that  he  calls  ancient,  and  says  that  he 
found  it  between  Foligno  and  Rome,  and  that  it  exhibits  an 
architectural  hcense  because  the  architrave  is  broken  by  the 
arch. 

In  the  court  of  the  Farnese  we  have  a  frank  return  to  the 
1  op.  cit.,  bk.  3,  p.  53. 


Fig.  63.  —  Window  of  the  Farnese. 


ii8 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


ancient  Roman  combination  of  arch  and  entablature,  with  a 
Doric  order  in  the  basement,  an  Ionic  order  next  above  it, 
and  an  order  of  Corinthian  pilasters  in  the  top  story.  Where 
engaged  orders  are  thus  used  in  the  inside  of  a  rectangle  it  is 
usual  to  set  a  section  of  a  pilaster  in  the  angle,  as  the  architect 
has  done  here.  But  the  treatment  of  the  capital  in  this  angle 
becomes  a  matter  of  difficulty  which  cannot  be  overcome  in  an 


Fig.  64.  —  Portal  from  Serlio. 


entirely  satisfactory  manner.  This  is  especially  the  case  where 
the  Ionic  order  is  used,  as  in  the  principal  story  of  this  court. 
It  is  necessary  here  to  have  parts  of  two  capitals,  on  the  angle 
strip  of  pilaster,  in  order  that  there  may  be  a  bolster  on  each 
side  parallel  with  those  of  the  other  capitals  in  the  colonnade 
to  which  it  belongs,  and  a  volute  on  each  side  facing  in  the 
same  direction  as  the  others  in  the  same   series.     Thus   two 


VII  PALACE  ARCHITECTURE  119 

volutes  have  to  be  mitred  together  with  awkward  effect.  A 
further  awkwardness  arising  from  this  misuse  of  the  orders 
is  that  of  bringing  three  supporting  members  together  in  the 
angles,  the  end  column  of  each  adjoining  colonnade,  and  the 
pilaster  set  in  the  angle  in  which  they  meet. 

An  earUer  instance  of  the  Roman  arch  and  entablature 
scheme  applied  to  a  continuous  arcade  occurs  in  Rome-  in  the 
cloister  of  Santa  Maria  della  Pace,  the  design  of  which  is  at- 
tributed to  Bramante.  The  upper  story  of  this  arcade  is  worthy 
of  notice  as  having  a  rhythmical  scheme,  such  as  is  common 
in  mediaeval  design,  wrought  into  the  neo-classic  composition. 
This  story  has  no  arches,  but  a  simple  entablature  is  carried 
on  square  piers  rising  over  the  piers  of  the  ground  story, 
with  a  pilaster  on  the  face  of  each,  and  in  each  interval  is 
a  small  round  column  rising  over  the  crown  of  the  arch 
below.  But  this  alternation  of  large  and  small,  and  compound 
and  simple,  members  has  no  meaning  apart  from  that  of  orna- 
mental effect.  In  mediaeval  design,  the  larger  members  would 
have  the  function  of  supporting  heavier  weights,  and  the 
rhythmical  arrangement  would  thus  have  a  primarily  struc- 
tural meaning. 

After  the  early  part  of  the  sixteenth  century  Italy,  as  before 
remarked,  produced  few  architects  of  a  high  order  of  genius. 
The  later  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  is  the  work  of  men 
of  little  genuine  artistic  inspiration,  though  many  of  them  had 
great  enthusiasm  for  what  they  conceived  to  be  the  true  prin- 
ciples of  the  art  and  unbounded  zeal  in  its  practice.  A  few 
typical  examples  of  the  later  forms  of  palatial  design  by  such 
men  as  Sansovino,  Sanmichele,  Vignola,  Palladio,  and  Scamozzi 
will  be  enough  for  us  to  consider.  All  of  these  men  based 
their  practice  theoretically,  as  we  have  seen,  on  the  writings  of 
Vitruvius  and  on  a  rigorous  study  of  the  architectural  remains 
of  Roman  antiquity  ;  and  nearly  all  of  them  wrote  treatises 
on  their  art  which  have  formed  the  basis  of  most  modern 
practice. 

Jacopo  Tatti,  called  Sansovino,  went  to  Rome  early  in  the 
sixteenth  century  in  company  with  Giuliano  de  San  Gallo, 
and  there  formed  a  friendship  with  Bramante,^  under  whose 
influence   he   acquired   that   exclusive  predilection    for    classic 

1  Milizia,  vol.  i,  p.  346. 


I20 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 


Fig.  65.  —  Part  of  facade  of  the  Library  of  St.  Mark. 


forms  which  we  find  reflected  in  his  art.  Coming  to  Florence, 
we  are  not  told  in  what  year,  he  designed  a  false  front  of  wood 
for  the  cathedral  church  of  Santa  Maria  del  Fiore,  which  is 


VII 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


121 


said  to  have  called  forth  the  admiration  of  Pope  Leo  X.^  This 
incident  is  significant  of  the  spirit  of  the  time,  and  such  archi- 
tectural shams  were  extensively  produced  by  the  architects  of 
the  later  Renaissance.  The  most  important  works  of  Sansovino 
are  in  Venice,  where  he  built  the  well-known  Library  of  St. 
Mark,  the  so-called  Loggia  of  the  Campanile,  the  Palazzo 
Cornaro,  and  several  other  large  buildings. 

The  facade  of  the  Library  of  St.  Mark  has  but  two  stories 
including  the  basement,  and  these  are  adorned  with  a  Doric 


P"iG.  66.  —  Corner  of  the  Parthenon. 


and  an  Ionic  order  respectively  (Fig.  65);  the  first  noticeable 
peculiarity  of  this  design  is  its  very  florid  character.  The 
reveals  are  deep,  the  orders  are  in  high  relief,  and  the  friezes 
and  arch  spandrels  are  loaded  with  showy  ornamental  carvings. 
Milizia  says^  that  in  the  Doric  order  of  this  facade  Sansovino 
attempted  .to  solve  a  problem  which  had  troubled  all  of  the 
Italian  architects,  namely,  how  to  make  exactly  half  of  a  met- 
ope fall  at  the  end  of  the  frieze.  The  Greeks  had  placed  a 
triglyph  at  the  angle,  but  in  so  doing  they  had  been  obliged 
to  sacrifice  uniformity,  since  this  angle  triglyph  fell  over  one 

1  Milizia,  vol.  i,  pp.  346-347.  2  Jbid.,  p.  351. 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


side  of  the  corner  column,  instead  of  over  its  centre  as  the 
other  triglyphs  of  the  series  did  (Fig.  66).  This  had  made  it 
necessary  to  lengthen  the  last  metope,  and  to  narrow  the  last 
intercolumniation.  The  Romans  had  set  the  last  triglyph  over 
the  centre  of  the  corner  column,  and  had  thus  been  obliged  to 
give  less  than  half  a  metope  to  the  corner  (Fig.  6"]),  though 
they  secured  uniformity  in  all  the  rest  of  the  parts.  The 
frieze,  however,  had  now  an  appearance  of  incompleteness  at 
each    end,   as  of   a  thing    cut  off   arbitrarily  through   one  of 

its  members.  The 
architects  of  the 
Renaissance  appear 
to  have  disliked  this 
narrow  section  of  a 
metope  at  the  end 
of  the  frieze,  and  to 
have  sought  a  way 
to  make  it  exactly 
half.  This,  as  Milizia 
tells  us,  Sansovino 
did  in  the  Library 
of  St.  Mark  by 
lengthening  the 
frieze  enough  to  give 
the  fragment  of  met- 
ope the  width  that 
was  desired.  Turn- 
ing to  the  design 
itself  (Fig.  68),  we  find  that  this  obliged  him  to  set  a  square 
pier  with  a  pilaster  on  its  face  at  the  angle.  Of  this  device 
Milizia  remarks  that  it  was  a  folly. ^ 

In  the  general  scheme  of  this  fagade  (Fig.  65)  Sansovino 
has  followed  that  of  the  ancient  theatre  of  Marcellus,  with  a 
free  introduction  of  additional  enrichments.  In  the  order  of 
the  basement  he  has  departed  from  the  severe  plainness  of  the 
Roman  model  by  adding  mouldings  and  keystones  to  the 
archivolts,  reliefs  to  the  spandrels,  and  disks  to  the  metopes 

^  "  Sansovino  lo  sciolse  con  allungar  il  fregio  quanto  bastasse  per  supplire 
al   difetto  di  quella   porzione  di  metopa:  ed  il   problema,   e   '1  ripiego   sono  un' 


Fig.  67.  —  Roman  corner. 


VII 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


123 


of  the  frieze.  But  all  this  is  done  with  a  commendable  feeling 
for  breadth  of  effect.  To  the  order  of  the  upper  story  he  has 
made  more  striking  additions,  the  most  noticeable  of  which  is 
the  insertion  of  a  small  free-standing  column  on  each  side  of 
the  pier  to  bear  the  archivoit,  an  innovation  which  was  followed 
by  Palladio  and  many  later 
architects.  The  least  admirable 
features  of  the  design  are  the 
frieze  of  the  upper  order, 
which  is  widened  beyond  all 
tolerable  proportion,  and  an 
ornamental  balustrade  over  the 
main  cornice.  The  frieze  is 
ornamented  with  inelegant  fes- 
toons in  high  relief,  and  pierced 
with  oblong  windows  opening 
into  a  low  upper  story  which 
the  entablature  encloses.  The 
columns  of  the  upper  order, 
as  well  as  the  free-standing 
colonnettes,  are  raised  on  pan- 
elled pedestals,  and  balustraded 
balconies  are  formed  in  front 
of  each  window  opening.  This 
sumptuous  scheme  embodies 
very  fully  the  ideal  to  which 
the  designers  of  the  Renais- 
sance had  been  tending  under 
the  Roman  influence  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  and  it  has 
been  extensively  reproduced,  Fig.  68.  —  Angle  of  Library  of  St.  Mark, 
with  various  minor  modifica- 
tions, in  the  civic  architecture  of  all  parts  of  Europe. 

As  the  facade  of  the  Library  of  St.  Mark  is  based  upon 
that  of  the  ancient  theatre  of  Marcellus,  so  the  Loggetta  of  the 
Campanile  is  an  adaptation  of  the  scheme  of  the  Arch  of  Titus 
extended  to  include  three  arches,  and  enriched  with  statues 
and  reliefs  to  suit  the  florid  fancy  of  the  time.  But  while  the 
scheme  is  plainly  derived  from  the  Arch  of  Titus,  the  propor- 
tions of  the  parts  are  very  different,  and  much  less  admirable. 


124 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


The  order  is  made  lower  and  the  attic  higher.  The  Arch  of 
Titus  is  the  finest  in  proportions  of  all  the  Roman  triumphal 
arches,  and  the  grandest  in  monumental  simplicity.  Sansovino's 
changes  and  ornamental  additions  spoil  the  composition,  and 
do  not  fit  the  design  for  the  building  to  which  it  is  attached. 
Such  a  design  could  not  have  any  proper  relationship 
to  such  a  building.  To  attach  any 
sort  of  a  Roman  triumphal  arch  scheme 
to  the  base  of  a  mediaeval  tower  is  an 
architectural  absurdity. 

In  the  scheme  of  the  Palazzo  Cor- 
naro  an  Ionic  order  and  a  Corinthian 
order  frame  in  the  round-headed  win- 
dows of  the  upper  stories.  The  columns 
of  these  orders  are  set  in  pairs,  each 
pair  having  a  plinth  and  pedestal  in 
common.  On  the  side  walls  of  the 
building  these  orders  are  returned  to 
the  extent  of  one  bay,  which  brings 
four  columns  together  at  the  angles 
with  clumsy  effect.  The  frieze  of  the 
uppermost  entablature  is  widened,  as  in 
the  Library  of  St.  Mark,  but  its  surface 
^^.,  ,    .   ,.        is  plain  save  for  a  series  of  oval  open- 

Q  •  I  ,/,  I'siQl        ings  which  light  a  low  attic.     The  high 

rusticated  basement,  which  includes  a 
mezzanine,  has  square-headed  windows 
framed  by  a  rusticated  Doric  order  rest- 
ing on  a  projecting  sill  supported  on 
plain  consoles ;  and  over  each  of  these 
a  low  rectangular  window,  flanked  by 
elongated  consoles  on  square  blocks  set 
upon  the  entablature  of  the  window 
below,  lights  the  mezzanine.  A  curved  pediment  over  each 
of  the  lower  windows,  between  the  blocks  that  support  the 
flanking  members  of  the  windows  above,  gives  further  awk- 
wardness to  the  total  scheme  (Fig.  69).  Barbaric  composi- 
tions such  as  this  were  now  to  become  of  frequent  occurrence 
in  the  architecture  of  the  later  Renaissance.  While  the  de- 
signers were  eliminating  the  mediaeval  forms  more  completely 


Fk;.  69.  —  Palazzo  Cornaro. 


VII 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


125 


than  their  predecessors  had  done,  they  were  at  the  same  time 
departing  more  widely  from  classic  models,  and  introducing 
many  monstrosities  of  composition,  from  the  influence  of  which 
modern  art  has  greatly  suffered. 

The  works  of  Sanmichele  show  an  equally  exclusive  employ- 
ment of  classic  features,  with  the  same  freedom  in  deforming 
them  and  using  them  in  novel  and  ungainly  ways.  In  the 
Porta  del  Palio  of  Verona,  a  characteristic  example  of  his  work, 
he  has  used  a  pseudo-Doric  order  in  which  the  columns  are 
fluted  after  the  Ionic  manner  with  fillets  between  the  channels, 
and  are  raised  on  heavy  square  plinths.     The  columns  are  dis- 


FlG.  70.  —  Two  bays  of  the  Porta  del  Palio. 

posed  in  pairs,  dividing  the  facade  into  three  wide  intervals  and 
four  narrow  ones  (Fig.  70),  and  each  wide  space  has  a  large 
rectangular  recess  spanned  by  a  fiat  arch,  with  a  sculptured 
keystone  in  the  form  of  a  console,  under  the  entablature  of  the 
order.  At  the  level  of  the  soffit  of  this  arch  the  wall  is  crowned 
by  a  cornice  passing  behind  the  columns.  The  central  bay  has 
a  large  rectangular  portal  without  jamb  mouldings,  and  in  each 
lateral  bay  is.  a  small  doorway  framed  with  classic  jamb  mould- 
ings and  a  pediment  on  consoles.  Over  each  of  these  openings 
is  a  secondary  flat  arch  with  deep  voussoirs  reaching  to  the 
soffit  of  the  upper  one.  Pilasters  take  the  place  of  columns 
on  the  angles  of  the  fa9ade,  and  the  walls  are  rusticated.     In 


126  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

the  facade  of  the  opposite  side  the  scheme  is  varied,  and  is 
plainer.  The  columns  of  the  order  are  disposed  as  before,  but 
instead  of  being  fluted  they  are  rusticated  like  the  walls,  and 
have  no  bases,  while  a  large  round-arched  opening,  with  impost 
mouldings  and  a  plain  keystone,  fills  each  wide  interval. 

Of  Sanmichele's  palace  fronts  the  best  in  Verona  is,  I  think, 
that  of  the  Palazzo  Canossa,  where  over  a  high  rusticated  base- 
ment he  has  placed  a  shallow  order  of  Corinthian  pilasters  in 
pairs,  set  close  together,  on  a  podium  with  ressauts.  This  order 
embraces  both  the  principal  floor  and  a  low  story  above  it,  and 
has  considerable  elegance.  The  effect  of  the  whole  front  is 
broad  and  quiet,  save  for  the  heavy  balustrade  with  showy 
statues  which  crowns  it.  It  will  be  seen,  as  we  pass  in  review 
these  different  compositions,  that  the  range  of  eccentricities  of 
design  embodied  in  them  is  as  great  as  we  find  in  the  works 
of  the  earlier  Renaissance,  though  they  show  fewer  mediaeval 
characteristics.  The  Palazzo  Pompei  alia  Vittoria,  also  by 
Sanmichele,  for  instance,  has  a  Doric  order  over  a  plain  rusti- 
cated basement,  like  that  of  the  Porta  del  Palio,  but  with  the 
columns  equally  spaced,  except  that  the  central  intercolumnia- 
tion  is  made  wider  than  the  others  in  conformity  with  the  width 
of  the  portal  beneath  it,  and  a  pilaster  is  coupled  with  a  column 
on  each  angle.  Plain  round-arched  windows  occupy  the  inter- 
vals between  the  columns,  and  a  corbel  in  the  form  of  a  sculp- 
tured head  is  set  under  the  entablature  of  the  order  over  the 
crown  of  each  arch.  The  plain  windows  of  the  basement  have 
clumsy  rectangular  sills  on  consoles. 

A  more  elaborate  design  by  the  same  architect  is  that  of  the 
front  of  the  Palazzo  Bevilacqua  (Fig.  71).  Here  an  order  of 
rusticated  Doric  pilasters,  supporting  an  entablature  with  chan- 
nelled consoles  in  the  place  of  triglyphs,  and  a  cornice  sur- 
mounted with  a  balustrade  forming  a  balcony  to  the  story 
above,  divides  the  basement  wall  into  alternately  wide  and 
narrow  bays.  A  round-arched  window  in  each  bay  has  a  heavy 
keystone  in  the  form  of  a  sculptured  bust,  which  forms  at  the 
same  time  a  corbel  to  the  entablature.  The  unequal  spacing  of 
the  pilasters  leads  to  an  awkward  irregularity  in  the  spacing 
of  the  channelled  consoles  which  do  duty  as  triglyphs  in  the  frieze. 
One  of  them  is  set  over  the  centre  of  each  pilaster,  and  the 
spaces   over    the  wide   intervals   each  give  place   to   three   of 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


127 


them,  while  over  the  narrow  intervals  there  is  too  much  room 
for  one  and  not  enough  for  two.  The  designer  has  chosen  to 
have  but  one,  and  the  effect  of  the  resulting  wider  spacing  over 
the  narrow  bays  is  both  unpleasant  and  unclassic.  The  upper 
story  has  a  still  more 
barocco  character.  A 
Corinthian  order  with 
columns  of  alternately 
straight  and  spiral  chan- 
nelling, spaced  in  con- 
formity with  the  pilasters 
of  the  basement  and 
raised  on  pedestals, 
frames  in  a  series  of 
round  -  arched  windows 
which  are  alternately 
large  and  small  in  corre- 
spondence with  the  mag- 
nitudes of  the  intervals. 
The  window  of  each  wide 
bay  nearly  fills  the  space 
enclosed  by  the  order, 
and  a  keystone  in  the 
arch  forms  a  corbel  to 
the  entablature,  while  the 
spandrels  are  adorned 
with  sculptures  in  high 
relief  after  the  manner 
of  those  of  the  Roman 
triumphal  arches.  Over 
the  smaller  arch  in  each 
narrow  bay  the  spandrels 
are  in  relief  and  are 
crowned  with  a  pediment 
surmounted  by  a  horizon- 
tal cornice  on  a  shallow 

ressaut  corresponding  to  that  of  the  spandrels,  while  over  all 
this  a  plain  oblong  rectangular  opening  lights  a  low  top  story 
which  is  not  otherwise  expressed  in  the  composition.  In  these 
narrow  bays  the  corbels  are  introduced  under  the  entablature 


Fig.  71.  —  Palazzo  Bevilaccjua. 


128  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

as  in  the  wider  ones,  and  carved  festoons  fill  the  spaces  between 
them  and  the  capitals  on  either  side.  It  is  a  capricious  scheme, 
by  which  the  designer  has  sought  to  quicken  the  jaded  sensi- 
bilities of  people  surfeited  with  architectural  aberrations.  Of 
course  the  arrangement  of  these  elements  is  based- on  a  certain 
rhythmical  order  which  often  appears  to  be  thought  a  sufficient 
justification  of  such  meaningless  compositions;  but  order  and 
rhythm  do  not  alone  constitute  a  fine  work  of  art. 

Of  the  secular  architecture  of  Vignola  the  Palazzo  Caprarola, 
in  the  hill  country  between  Rome  and  Viterbo,  is  the  most 
important.  This  building,  says  Milizia,  "  is  without  doubt  the 
grandest  and  the  most  beautiful  work  of  this  great  artist."^ 
The  building,  which  is  illustrated  by  elaborate  drawings  in 
Vignola's  own  book,  has  in  plan  the  form  of  a  regular  pentagon 
enclosing  a  circular  court.  The  form  is,  of  course,  given  from 
pure  caprice,  and  imposes  needless  difficulties,  as  if  with  the 
sole  purpose  of  ingeniously  solving  them.  The  basement,  with 
a  salient  fortress-like  bastion  on  each  angle,  is  in  two  stages,  of 
which  the  lower  one  has  a  batter  wall.  Over  this  are  the  prin- 
cipal story  of  the  state  apartments,  and  two  other  stories 
containing  upward  of  eighty  sleeping  chambers.  Slightly 
projecting  bays  are  formed  on  the  angles,  as  in  the  Cancelleria 
at  Rome,  and  each  facade  is  divided  into  two  stages  by  super- 
imposed orders  of  pilasters  on  high  pedestals.  The  projecting 
bays  have  rusticated  quoins  instead  of  pilasters,  and  the  wall  of 
the  first  story  of  each  of  these  bays  is  rusticated.  An  open 
loggia  with  five  arches  in  the  intervals  of  the  order,  and  one 
enclosed  arch  at  each^end,  reaches  across  the  main  front  of 
the  principal  story  between  the  saHent  bays,  and  the  main 
portal  is  an  arched  opening,  with  rusticated  jambs  in  relief  and 
an  entablature,  in  the  upper  stage  of  the  basement.  This 
portal  is  reached  by  a  double  ramp  mounting  an  outer  terrace 
and  the  lower  basement  stage.  Below  this,  giving  access  to 
the  lower  basement,  is  a  rusticated  portico  with  an  order  of 
rusticated  pilasters  and  three  open  arches  flanked  by  two  narrow 
enclosed  bays  with  niches,  and  crowned  with  a  balustrade. 

The  circular  court  has  an  open  arcade  of  widely  spaced 
arches  in  two  stages,  of  which  the  lower  one  has  a  plain  rusti- 
cated wall,  and  the  upper  one  an  Ionic  order  with  columns  in 

^  Meniorie,  etc.,  vol.  2,  p.  34. 


VII 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


129 


Fig.  72.  —  Part  of  the  Portico  of  Vicenza,  from  Palladio's  book. 


pairs,  and  a  balustrade  with  statues  crowning  the  entablature. 
This  sumptuous  monument  was  a  source  of  inspiration  to  the 

K 


I30 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


later  architects  of  the  transalpine  Renaissance,  and  De  I'Orme's 
oval  courts  of  the  Tuileries,  and  the  circular  courts  of  the  palace 
of  Whitehall  by  Inigo  Jones,  suggest  its  influence. 

But  in  domestic  and  civic  architecture  Palladio  was  more 
prolific  than  Vignola,  and  his  work  has  had  a  correspondingly- 
wider  influence.  Among  the  earlier  civic  buildings  by  him  is 
the  well-known  portico  of  the  town  hall  of  his  native  city, 
Vicenza.  This  portico  of  two  stories  covers  three  sides  of  a 
building  of  oblong  rectangular  plan,  dating  from  the  Middle 
Ages,  and  consisting  of  a  great  hall  over  a  low  basement. 
Palladio's  scheme  (Fig.  72)  for  this  portico  is  plainly  derived 
from  the  town  hall  of  Padua  to  which  he  refers  in  his  book 
as  a  most  notable  edifice.^  But  while  basing  his  design 
on  that  of  Padua,  he  modifies  it  by  features  drawn  from  other 
sources.  In  place  of  the  simple  arcades  of  the  mediaeval  Paduan 
model,  he  has  substituted  a  complicated  combination  of  arches 
with  large  and  small  orders,  in  which  the  inspiration  of  Sanso- 
vino's  Library  of  St.  Mark  in  Venice  is  apparent.  The  free- 
standing column  under  the  archivolt  of  Sansovino's  upper  story 
(Fig.  65,  p.  120)  is  reproduced  by  Palladio  in  both  stories  of  the 
portico  of  Vicenza.  But  instead  of  a  single  column,  he  has 
inserted  a  pair  on  each  side  of  the  arch,  ranged  in  the  direction 
of  the  thickness  of  the  wall,  as  shown  in  the  plan  (Fig.  73). 


.<— "p  — 10 


-P  —10 


Fig.  73. 

The  intervals  between  the  columns  of  the  great  orders  are  very 
wide,  because  they  had  to  conform  with  the  spacing  of  the 
openings  in  the  mediaeval  structure  enclosed ;  but  the  arches 
within  the  intervals  are  necessarily  of  narrower  span,  since 
their  crowns  could  not  rise  above  the  soffit  of  the  entablature. 
Thus  the  free-standing  columns  of  the  small  order  which  support 
these  arches  are  set  farther  away  from  the  pier  than  they  are  in 
Sansovino's  scheme.     This  free-standing  column  supporting  the 


1  /  Quattro  Libri  delV  Architettura,  bk.  3,  p.  41. 


VII 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


131 


archivolt  is  often  spoken  of  as  an  innovation  of  Sansovino  and 
Palladio.  It  is  worthy  of  notice,  however,  that  instances  of  it 
occur  in  the  Grseco- Roman  architecture  of  Syria,  as  in  S.  Simeon 
Styhtes  (Fig.  74);  but  the  arch  in  these  cases  is  not  framed  in 
with  the  useless  order.     In 


the  ground  story  arcade  of 
Padua  the  spandrels  have 
circular  perforations,  and 
these  are  reproduced  by 
Palladio  in  both  stories  of 
his  portico. 

From  a  structural  point 
of  view  Palladio's  scheme 
is  an  improvement  on  that 
of  Padua.  For  in  Padua, 
as  in  Vicenza,  both  stories 
of  the  portico  are  vavilted, 
and  the  slender  columns 
which  alone  bear  the  vault- 
ing are  too  weak  to  with- 
stand the  thrusts   of   this 

vaulting,    and    thus    both 

i.  J  1       „-4-    J*      1  Fig.  74.  —  Arch  of  St.  Simeon  Stylites. 

transverse  and  longitudmal  '^  ^ 

tie-rods  are  inserted  to  maintain  the  stability  of  the  fabric.     But 

Palladio's    massive    and    heavily    weighted   piers    are    strong 

enough  to  bear  the  thrusts  without  the  aid  of  ties,  and  it  may 

be  added  that  the  great  orders  have  more  function  here  than 

they  usually  have  in  Renaissance  design,  since  their  columns 

act   somewhat  as  buttresses.     The  shaft  of  an  order  has  not, 

indeed,  a  proper  form  for  an  abutment,  and    has  no  buttress 

expression.     Its  resistance  to  thrust  is  slight,  but  it  is   better 

than  nothing  at  all.     Following   Sansovino,  the  architect  has 

introduced  a  balustrade  in  each  opening  of  the  arcade,  and  a 

continuous  one  as  a  crowning  feature  of  the  cornice. 

Palladio  himself  thought  well  of  this  work,  and  he  does  not 

hesitate  to  say  in  his  book  that  it  will  bear  comparison  with  the 

most  beautiful  buildings  of  antiquity.      He  tells  us,  also,  that  it 

is  constructed  in  the  best  manner  out  of  excellent  cut  stone.^ 


^  "  Non  dubito  che  questa  fabrica  non  possa  esser  comparata  a  gli  edifici  antichi 
e  annoverata  tra  le  maggiori,  e  le  piu  belle  fabriche  che  sianu  state  fatte  da   gli 


132 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


The  last  remark  is  significant,  for  genuine  stone  masonry  was 
not  always  employed  by  Palladio  in  buildings  which  had  the 
appearance  of  stone  construction.  The  use  of  brick  and  rubble 
with  a  revetment  of  stucco  had  not  been  uncommon  with  the 


Fig.  75.  —  Loggia  Bemarda. 


builders  of  the  early  Renaissance,  and  such  materials  were 
extensively  employed  even  by  Bramante  and  Michael  Angelo. 
But  Palladio  went  further  than  his  predecessors  in  the  creation 
of  architectural  shams. 

antichi  in  quk,  si  per  la  grandezza,  e  per  gli  ornamenti  suoi,  come  anco  per  la  materia, 
che  e  tutta  di  pietra  viva  durisima,  e  sono  state  tutte  le  pietre  commesse  e  legate 
insieme  con  somma  diligenza."     Op.  cit.,  bk.  3,  p.  41. 


VII 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


133 


Palladio  was  an  earnest  devotee  of  his  art  as  he  understood 
it,  but  he  had  what  may  be  called  a  theatrical  ideal  of  architec- 
ture. The  superficial  appearance  was  what  chiefly  concerned 
him.  He  had  great  versatility  in  scenic  and  structurally  mean- 
ingless composition,  and  his  numerous  palace  fronts  in  Vicenza 
are  remarkable  for  their  superficially  varied  character.  The 
Palazzo  Valmarana,  with  its  colossal  pilasters  on  a  high  podium 
overlapping  a  lesser  order  embracing  the  basement  and  mez- 
zanine, while  the  great  entablature 
is  broken  into  ressauts  over  the  pi- 
lasters ;  the  Palazzo  Colleone-Porta, 
with  its  basement  wall  rusticated 
over  a  plain  dado  and  an  Ionic 
order  on  the  face  of  the  superstruc- 
ture; the  Palazzo  Porta-Barbarano, 
with  its  superimposed  orders  and 
elaborate  ornamentation  in  stucco 
relief ;  and  the  Loggia  Bernarda, 
with  its  gigantic  composite  order 
and  balcony  corbels  in  the  form  of 
Doric  triglyphs  (Fig.  75),  are  suf- 
ficient illustrations  of  this.  The 
skin  of  stucco  with  which  many  of 
these  buildings  were  originally  cov- 
ered has  broken  off  in  many  places, 
revealing  the  poor  materials  of  which 
they  are  built. 

Palladio's  compositions  are,  indeed,  based  on  order  and 
symmetry,  but  order  and  symmetry  of  a  mechanical  kind.  On 
these  and  other  kindred  qualities  grammarians  in  art  are  prone 
to  lay  great  stress,  but  unless  accompanied  by  many  others, 
which  for  the  most  part  elude  all  human  powers  of  analysis  and 
description,  though  they  are  instinctively  grasped  by  the  true 
artist  and  appreciated  by  the  discerning  and  sympathetic 
beholder,  they  have  little  value.  Palladio  and  his  associates 
were  not  true  artists,  they  were  grammatical  formalists  without 
the  inspiration  of  genius.^     As  for  Scamozzi,  little  need  be  said. 

1  They  were  grammatical,  not  in  the  sense  of  using  the  classic  orders  with  cor- 
rectness,—  this,  as  we  have  seen,  they  did  not  do,  —  but  in  the  sense  of  ananging 
their  architectural  details,  such  as  they  were,  on  a  basis  of  grammatical  order. 


Fig.  76.- 


•  Window  of  Palazzo 
Branzo. 


134 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE        chap,  vii 


Milizia  tells  us  that  he  studied  architecture  with  his  father,  but 
that  his  real  masters  were  the  monuments  of  art  themselves ; 
and  that,  stimulated  by  the  fame  of  Sansovino  and  Palladio,  he 
observed  their  compositions  closely,  and  conceived  the  ambition 
to  surpass  them.  His  works,  which  do  not  differ  materially 
from  those  of  these  masters,  present  no  features  that  are  worthy 
of  special  remark,  unless  a  peculiar  form  of  compound  window, 
which  occurs  in  the  Palazzo  Branzo  in  Vicenza,  be  an  excep- 
tion. In  this  composition,  often  reproduced  in  the  later  Re- 
naissance architecture  of  all 
countries,  two  narrow  square- 
headed  openings,  each  crowned 
with  an  entablature,  flank  a 
wider  one  spanned  by  an  arch 
(Fig.  ^6^  This  composition 
has  been  called  an  invention  of 
Scamozzi's.^  But  there  had 
been  many  previous  instances 
of  its  most  noticeable  feature, 
i.e.  the  entablature  broken  by 
an  arch,  as  in  the  porch  of  the 
Pazzi  by  Brunelleschi.  I  do  not 
know  that  windows  had  before 
been  designed  in  this  form  in 
the  architecture  of  the  Renais- 
"sance;  but  the  same  composi- 
architecture   of    Syria,  as  in   the 


Fig.  77.  —  Basilica  of  Shakka. 


tion    occurs   in   the    Roman 
Basilica  of  Shakka  (Fig.  yf). 

We  have  thus  far  confined  our  attention  to  the  architecture 
of  the  Renaissance  as  it  was  developed  under  the  Florentine 
and  Roman  influences,  early  and  late.  We  must  now  notice 
some  of  the  phases  which  the  art  assumed  under  other  local 
influences  that  were  subordinately  active,  chiefly  in  the  north 
of  Italy. 

1  Sir  William  Chambers,  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Decorative  Part  of  Civil  Archi- 
lecture,  London,  179 1,  p.  121,  referring  to  this  form  of  opening,  says,  "  It  is  an  inven- 
tion of  Scamozzi's." 


Plate  V 


S^ysr  BERNARDINO 
Perugiai 


CHAPTER   VIII 

CHURCH    ARCHITECTURE    OF    THE    RENAISSANCE    IN    NORTH    ITALY 

While  the  architecture  of  the  Italian  Renaissance  assumed 
the  two  principal  phases  that  are  broadly  classified  as  Florentine 
and  Roman,  from  the  localities  in  which  the  conditions  and 
influences  that  gave  rise  to  them  chiefly  prevailed,  it  is  also 
true,  as  is  well  known,  that  other  influences  became  active  in 
various  parts  of  Italy,  leading  to  the  production  of  phases  of 
design  that  cannot  be  strictly  classed  as  either  Florentine  or 
Roman,  No  exact  classification  of  these  can  be  made,  but  the 
most  marked  types  having  distinctly  local  characteristics  are 
those  of  Lombardy  and  Venice. 

But  before  we  examiine  the  church  architecture  of  the  Lom- 
bard and  Venetian  Renaissance,  one  small  building  of  excep- 
tional character  in  central  Italy  is  worthy  of  special  notice, 
namely,  the  facade  of  the  church  of  San  Bernardino  of  Perugia, 
dating  from  the  second  half  of  the  fifteenth  century.  This 
work  is  remarkable  for  delicate  workmanship,  and  affords 
a  rare  instance  of  the  use  of  colour  in  the  architecture  of  the 
Renaissance.  It  is  made  up  of  red  and  white  marble,  with 
points  of  dark  green  and  turquoise  blue,  arranged  with  quiet 
harmony  of  effect.  But  it  is  a  combination  of  members  put 
together  with  no  regard  to  structural  consistency.  The  designer 
appears  to  have  had  not  the  sUghtest  idea  that  arches  and 
columns,  pilasters  and  entablatures,  have  any  meaning  save  as 
elements  of  abstract  ornamental  composition  to  be  played  about 
according  to  his  fancy.  The  front  (Plate  V)  is  an  upright 
rectangle,  crowned  with  an  entablature  and  a  low  pediment. 
A  broad  pilaster  is  set  on  each  angle,  and  the  space  between  is 
filled  with  a  wide  and  deep  recess  having  a  splayed  arch  reach- 
ing to  the  entablature  on  splayed  jambs.  A  smaller  entabla- 
ture at  the  arch  impost  crosses  the  entire  front,  breaking  around 
the  jambs  and  pilasters,  and  dividing  it  into  two  nearly  equal 
parts.     The  smaller  details  consist  of  panellings  and  medallions 

135 


136  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

in  the  splays  of  the  jambs  and  archivolts,  of  sculptured  reliefs 
on  the  tympanum  and  on  the  panels,  and  of  shafted  and  gabled 
niches  sheltering  statues  on  the  pilasters.  The  panels  of  the 
splays  are  flanked  with  diminutive  pilasters  which  are  super- 
imposed with  only  a  narrow  fillet  between  those  below  and 
those  which  rest  upon  them,  and  the  ornamental  framing  of  the 
niches  is  made  up  of  colonnettes  carrying  rectangular  stilt-blocks 
on  which  small  pediments  are  set.  The  elaborate  richness  of 
this  facade  is  unusual  in  the  Renaissance  architecture  of  cen- 
tral Italy,  except  in  the  smaller  compositions  of  tombs  and 
pulpits,  which  in  treatment  it  resembles.  But  profusion  of 
ornament  is  a  marked  characteristic  of  the  architecture  of  the 
Renaissance  in  north  Italy,  to  which  we  may  now  turn.  In 
Milan  and  Venice  the  neo-classic  influences  were,  even  more 
than  in  Florence  and  Rome,  confined  to  ornamental  details,  and 
in  these  details  the  designers  of  the  North  had  still  less  regard 
for  classic  correctness  and  consistency  than  those  of  central 
Italy  had  shown ;  while  the  larger  structural  forms  of  their 
buildings  still  remained  essentially  Lombard  and  Venetian. 
Much  of  the  architecture  of  the  North  was,  it  is  true,  the 
work  of  architects  from  central  Italy,  but  these  architects 
were  so  far  influenced  by  local  tastes  and  conditions  as  to  pro- 
duce designs  very  different  in  character  from  those  of  Florence 
or  of  Rome. 

A  characteristic  early  example  of  this  Northern  Renais- 
sance design  in  its  most  florid  form  is  the  well-known  facade 
of  the  church  of  the  Certosa  of  Pavia,  dating  from  the  close  of 
the  fifteenth  century.  The  effect  of  this  front  is  in  its  larger 
parts  much  like  that  of  a  late  mediaeval  Italian  one,  but  the 
details  are  pseudo-classic  with  strange  admixture  of  mediaeval 
elements.  The  general  scheme  is  a  reproduction  of  the  pseudo- 
Gothic  facade  of  the  neighbouring  cathedral  of  Milan,  having 
nearly  the  same  general  proportions,  and  being  divided  into 
five  bays  by  deep  buttresses.  The  steep  gable,  however,  which 
in  Milan  embraces  the  whole  front,  is  omitted,  and  in  its  stead 
a  horizontal  cornice  crowns  the  three  central  bays,  and  this, 
together  with  the  strongly  marked  horizontal  lines  below, 
greatly  modifies  the  general  effect  of  the  composition.  In 
the  smaller  details  there  is  no  likeness  between  the  two  fa9ades, 
that   of    Pavia  showing  a  survival   of    Lombard    Romanesque 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


^n 


forms  with  the  pseudo-classic  elements  ingrafted  on  them.  A 
prominent  feature  of  the  Lombard  Romanesque  architecture 
is  the  diminutive  open  arcade.  This  feature  is  extensively 
employed  in  the  mediasval  portions  of  the  church  to  which  this 
facade  is  the  western  enclosure,  and  it  is  reproduced,  with  neo- 
classic  modifications,  at  the  top  of  each  of  the  two  principal 
stages  into  which  the  facade  is  divided.  The  arches  are  here 
carried    on    small    piers,    and    are  .^ 

framed    with     diminutive    pilasters  ^,^-^.-^.. 

and  entablatures.  The  portal  has  /J2i\<l^(^^^^.^^^^^ 
a  pair  of  free-standing  Corinthian  '^-  ^  ^  — ==^^^^^^ 
columns  on  each  side,  bearing  a  res- 
saut  of  an  entablature  which  spans 
the  opening,  and  from  these  res- 
sauts  an  arch  is  sprung  with  span- 
drels in  rehef  crowned  with  a 
classic  cornice.  In  each  one  of  the 
other  bays  of  the  ground  story  a 
rectangular  window,  with  classic 
mouldings  and  a  cornice  of  classic 
profile,  is  subdivided  in  the  mediae- 
val manner  with  two  small  arches 
on  a  central  column  and  jamb 
shafts.  These  last  have  a  tapering 
form,  with  a  profusion  of  carved 
ornament  in  high  relief,  and  are 
like  the  shafts  of  candelabra  (Fig. 
78).  The  mediaeval  feature  of  a 
large  circular  opening  over  the  cen- 
tral portal  is  enclosed  within  a  rectangle  surmounted  by  an  en- 
tablature and  a  classic  pediment,  while  this  compound  is  flanked 
on  either  side  by  a  pair  of  arches  opening  beneath  a  larger 
arch.  To  all  this  mixture  of  Romanesque  and  neo-classic  fea- 
tures a  pseudo-Gothic  character  is  superadded  by  statues  set  in 
niches  of  the  buttresses,  and  spiky  pinnacles  over  the  lateral 
bays.  The  details  of  this  overelaborate  composition,  the  work 
of  several  successive  architects,  have  no  merit  in  themselves, 
and  the  work  as  a  whole  is  trivial  and  unmeaning. 

Among  the  monuments  of  the  early  Renaissance  in  Milan 
are  several  of  importance,  and  of  these  the  church  and  sacristy 


Fig.  78.  —  Certosa  of  Pavia. 


138  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

of  San  Satiro  are  of  special  interest  because  they  are  said  to 
have  been  designed  by  Bramante.^ 

The  church  bears,  I  think,  unmistakable  marks  of  Bra- 
mante's  authorship,  being  a  reflection  on  a  reduced  scale  of  St. 
Andrea  of  Mantua  by  Alberti,  which  there  is  every  reason  to 
believe  had  been  studied  and  admired  by  Bramante  during  his 
travels  in  the  north  for  improvement  in  his  art,  and  a  foreshad- 
owing of  the  great  scheme  which  he  subsequently  prepared  for 
St.  Peter's  in  Rome.  Like  St.  Andrea,  it  has  a  barrel-vaulted 
nave  and  transept,  with  a  dome  on  pendentives  over  the  cross- 
ing. The  aisles  have  groined  vaulting,  and  the  piers  are  square 
and  are  faced  with  pilasters.  The  dome  is  raised  on  a  very 
low  drum  moulded  in  stucco  into  the  form  of  an  entablature, 
and  the  vault  surfaces  are  elaborately  coffered  in  stucco. 
The  church  has  no  eastern  arm,  since  a  wall  with  a  much- 
venerated  painting  of  the  Virgin  is  said  to  have  stood  so  near 
the  site  that  space  for  such  an  arm  could  not  be  had  without 
demolishing  it ;  and  as  this  was  not  to  be  thought  of,  Bramante 
made  a  semblance  of  an  eastern  arm  in  the  form  of  a  sunk 
panel  with  splayed  sides,  on  which  he  wrought  in  stucco  rehef 
the  elaborate  perspective  which  is  so  noticeable  a  feature  of 
the  interior. 

The  sacristy  (Fig.  79)  was  built  immediately  after  the 
church,  in  the  form  of  an  octagon  about  eight  metres  in  diame- 
ter. It  is  covered  with  an  octagonal  dome  lighted  by  a  circu- 
lar opening  in  each  of  its  sides  just  above  the  springing  level. 
The  walls  of  the  interior  are  divided  into  two  stages,  the  lower 
one  having  segmental  niches  alternating  with  shallow  rec- 
tangular recesses,  one  on  each  side  of  the  polygon  except  that 
of  the  entrance,  while  the  stage  above  has  a  gallery,  like  a 
triforium,  in  the  thickness  of  the  wall,  with  a  pair  of  round- 
arched  openings  in  each  bay.  The  dome  is  enclosed  within  a 
drum  of  brick  which  is  covered  by  a  low-pitched  timber  roof. 

^  Cf.  Casati,  /  Capi  a"  Arte  di  Braniaiite  da  Urbino  nel  Alilanese,  Milan,  1870, 
p.  24  et  seq.  That  the  design  of  San  Satiro  was  made  by  Bramante,  Casati  gives  the 
evidence  of  a  document  printed  in  the  year  1500  by  the  deputies  of  the  church  in 
which  it  is  said,  "...  Come  vi  si  diede  principio  dopo  P  anno  1470  con  disegno  del 
celebre  Bramante.''''  And  he  finds  further  confirmation  of  Bramante's  authorship  in 
a  commentary  on  Vitruvius  by  Cesare  Cesariano,  printed  in  Conio  in  1521,  where 
this  author  states  that  the  church  and  sacristy  of  San  Satiro  were  designed  by  his 
preceptor,  Donate  of  Urbino,  called  Bramante. 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


139 


The  ornamental  details  of  the  interior  are  all  of  stucco,  and 
consist  of  two  superimposed  false  orders  of  pilasters  set  in  the 
angles,  and  broken  on  plan  so  as  to  fit  them,  the  entablature 


Yuj.  79.  —  Sacristy  of  San  Satiro. 


of  each  order  having  a  ressaut  over  each  pilaster,  and  the 
surfaces  of  the  friezes  and  pilasters  being  profusely  enriched 
with  ornaments  in  reUef.     But  these  details  are  said  to  have 


I40  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

been  extensively  worked  over  in  later  times,  so  that  it  is  doubt- 
ful whether  any  correct  idea  of  the  original  character  of  this 
interior  can  now  be  formed,  except  as  to  its  larger  features. 

The  monument  is  a  diminutive  adaptation,  in  simplified  form, 
of  a  local  mediaeval  type  of  building  of  which  San  Vitale  of 
Ravenna  appears  to  have  been  the  original  example,  and 
San  Lorenzo  of  Milan  an  offshoot.  There  are  points  of  simi- 
larity between  the  sacristy  of  San  Satiro  and  the  church  of  the 
Consolazione  of  Todi  (Fig.  36,  p.  76)  that  go  far  to  determine 
their  common  authorship.  The  superimposed  pilasters  broken 
into  the  angles  of  a  polygon,  the  niches  in  the  lower  bays,  and 
the  ribs  on  the  surfaces  of  the  vault  rising  from  the  pilasters  ^ 
are  similar  in  both. 

A  curious  domed  structure  of  the  early  Renaissance  in  Milan 
is  the  east  end  of  the  church  of  Santa  Maria  delle  Grazie.  The 
dome  is  hemispherical,  and  is  raised  on  a  drum  resting  on  pen- 
dentives  over  a  square  area.  The  most  noticeable  part  of  the 
composition  is  the  exterior,  which  completely  masks  the  inside. 
The  drum  (Fig.  80)  is  a  polygon  of  sixteen  sides,  and  is  in 
two  stages,  the  lower  one  of  which  is  solid,  and  rises  above  the 
springing  of  the  vault,  while  the  upper  stage,  in  the  form  of  an 
open  arcaded  gallery,  with  an  attic  in  retreat,  reaches  far  above 
the  haunch  of  the  dome  which  is  covered  with  a  low-pitched 
roof  of  timber  crowned  with  a  lantern.  The  lower  stage 
has  an  order  of  pilasters  with  a  nondescript  entablature,  having 
an  enormously  high  frieze  ornamented  with  an  engaged 
balustrade.  A  pair  of  square-headed  windows  with  mullions, 
surmounted  with  pediments,  opens  through  each  face  of  the 
polygon,  except  the  four  which  fall  over  the  piers  of  the  interior. 
Against  each  of  these  sides  a  turret  rises,  forming  an  abutment. 
A  panelled  podium  crowns  the  entablature  of  this  lower  stage, 
and  upon  it  the  shafted  arcade  of  the  top  story  rests.  The 
north  and  south  sides  of  the  square  beneath  have  each  a  low 
apse,  while  on  the  east  is  a  rectangular  choir  with  an  apse  like 
the  other  two. 

The  architectural  treatment  of  this  exterior  is  not  expressive 
of  the  inside.  The  square  parts  are  divided  into  four  stages 
answering   to  nothing  within,   and   the    lower   three   of   these 

^  Salient  ribs  of  stucco  are  carried  up  in  the  angles  of  the  dome  of  the  sacristy 
as  they  are  in  the  vaulting  of  the  apses  of  Todi. 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


141 


Stages  are  carried  around  the  apses.  The  wall  surfaces  are 
broken  into  rectangular  panellings  by  mouldings  and  pilasters, 
every  alternate  pilaster  in  the  third   stage   having  a   tapering 


Fig.  80.  —  Santa  Maria  delle  Grazie. 


ornamental  member,  like  the  window  shafts  of  the  Certosa  of 
Pavia,  worked  in  relief  on  its  face ;  and  the  panels  are  adorned 
with  disks  and  medallions.  Like  most  of  the  early  Renaissance 
architecture  of  Milan;  this  building  is  entirely  of  brick  with  orna- 
ments of  terra-cotta. 


142  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

The  design  is  attributed  to  Bramante,^  and  it  has  features 
that  lend  support  to  belief  in  this  authorship.  The  encircling 
arcade  at  the  top  suggests  the  encircling  colonnade  of  the  same 
architect's  subsequent  design  for  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's.  It 
may  not  be  unlikely  that  this  arcade,  wrought  while  the  author 
was  under  the  influence  of  the  local  Lombard  Romanesque,  sug- 
gested the  idea  of  the  encircling  colonnade  after  he  had  come 
under  the  severer  classic  influence  in  Rome.  The  alternation 
of  pilasters  in  the  top  story  of  the  apses,  with  the  two  inter- 
columns  over  each  interval  in  the  stage  below,  corresponds  to 
the  design  of  the  interior  of  the  sacristy  of  S.  Satiro. 

In  the  chapel  of  St.  Peter  Martyr  of  the  church  of  Sant'  Eus- 
torgio,  attributed  to  the  Florentine  architect  Michelozzi,  we  have 
a  circular  celled  vault  on  salient  ribs,  like  Brunelleschi's  vault  of 
the  Pazzi.  This  vault  is  enclosed  within  a  drum  carried  on  pen- 
dentives,  and  is  lighted  by  a  circular  opening  in  the  drum  under 
each  alternate  vault  cell.  The  drum  is  polygonal  on  the  outside, 
is  carried  up  far  above  the  haunch  of  the  vault,  and  is  covered 
with  a  low-pitch  roof  of  timber  crowned  with  a  tall  lantern. 
The  lower  walls  of  the  interior  of  the  square  beneath  this  vault 
have  an  order  of  pilasters,  and  over  the  entablature  of  this  order 
are  arched  windows,  one  on  the  north  and  the  other  on  the  south 
side,  each  of  which  has  a  mullion  and  jamb  shafts  of  the  Certosa 
tapering  type,  and  pseudo-Gothic  tracery.  Most  of  the  details 
of  this  interior  are  of  stone,  which  give  it  a  more  monumental 
character  than  the  buildings  before  noticed  have.  The  outside 
is  of  brick,  the  square  part  being  plain,  with  simple  angle  but- 
tresses, and  crowned  with  a  cornice  of  classic  profiling.  Pin- 
nacles made  up  of  neo-classic  details  rise  from  the  angles,  and 
the  drum  is  adorned  with  an  order  of  pilasters,  and  with  moulded 
circular  panels  alternating  with  circular  openings.  The  build- 
ing as  a  whole  has  the  moderation  of  the  works  of  the  early 
Florentine  Renaissance,  and  is  in  noticeable  contrast  to  the 
more  florid  designs  of  this  region  already  noticed. 

A  somewhat  later  example  of  ecclesiastical  architecture  of 
the  Renaissance  in  Milan  is  the  church  of  the  Monastero  Mag- 
giore,  dating  from  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and 
said  to  have  been  designed  by  Dolcebono,  a  pupil  of  Bramante. 
This  is  a  rectangular  structure  without  aisles,   having  round- 

^  Cf.  Casati,  op.  cit.,  p.  44. 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


143 


arched  pseudo-Gothic  vaulting,  and  divided  into  two  parts  by  a 
screen  across  the  middle,  and  into  two  stories  by  superimposed 
orders  of  pilasters.  In  each  bay  of  the  ground  story  is  a  deep 
round-arched  rectangular  recess  in  the  thickness  of  the  wall, 
and  over  each  of  these  an  open  gallery  with  two  colonnettes  and 
two  small  jamb  pilasters  carrying  an  entablature  over  each  of 


Fig.  81.  —  East  end  of  Como. 

the  lateral  spaces  so  formed,  and  an  arch  over  the  central  one, 
an  early  instance  of  a  form  of  compound  opening  that  was  much 
used  in  the  architecture  of  the  later  Renaissance.^ 

The  cathedral  of  Como  affords  further  illustration  of  the 
style  of  early  Renaissance  design  that  is  peculiar  to  north 
Italy.     The  building,  however,  has  parts  which  belong  to  dif- 

^  Cf.,  p.  134,  the  window  sometimes  called  that  of  Scamozzi. 


144  ARCHITECTURE  OF  TH^  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

ferent  periods  ranging  from  1396  to  the  early  part  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century.  The  features  most  worthy  of  attention  are 
chiefly  those  of  the  exterior, — the  east  end  and  the  sides  of  the 
nave.  It  is  said  that  Bramante  worked  here  also,  and  certainly 
as  viewed  from  the  east  the  composition  bears  a  striking  like- 
ness to  the  church  of  the  Consolazione  at  Todi  (pp.  74-77).  It  is, 
however,  in  the  larger  features  alone  that  the  likeness  holds. 
The  details  of  Como  are  not,  as  at  Todi,  of  purely  neo-classic 
character ;  they  are  mediaeval  Lombard  modified  by  neo-classic 
elements.  Instead  of  superimposed  orders  of  pilasters  we  have 
here  (Fig.  81)  Lombard  Romanesque  buttresses  reaching  from 
the  ground  to  the  cornice.  The  cornice  has  the  neo-classic  pro- 
filing, and  is  broken  into  ressauts  over  the  buttresses,  and  at  a 
lower  level  a  subordinate  band  of  mouldings  is  carried  along 
the  wall  and  around  the  buttresses,  the  whole  forming  a  like- 
ness to  an  entablature.  The  traditional  Lombard  features  pecul- 
iar to  this  region  are  further  reproduced  in  the  arcades  of  each 
bay  just  beneath  the  pseudo-entablature;  but  instead  of  medi- 
aeval colonnettes  these  small  arches  are  supported  by  diminutive 
pilasters.  The  walls  are  divided  into  three  stages  by  string 
courses  of  classic  profiling,  and  a  rectangular  window  with 
plain  classic  jambs  and  lintel  opens  in  each  bay  of  the  middle 
stage,  while  the  basement  wall  is  unbroken  by  openings.  Disks, 
one  in  each  bay,  adorn  the  frieze  of  the  simulated  entablature, 
and  a  sculptured  figure  is  worked  on  the  corresponding  part 
of  each  buttress.  The  bases  of  the  half  domes  over  the  apses 
are,  as  at  Todi,  treated  like  attics,  but  the  central  dome,  with 
its  high  drum,  is  not  by  Bramante.  It  is  of  a  later  period,  and 
has  a  more  advanced  neo-classic  character.  The  scheme  of  the 
Lombard  buttresses  is  extended  along  the  walls  of  the  nave, 
but  the  details  of  the  window  openings,  and  of  the  portals  here 
are  very  different  from  anything  in  the  apses,  and  are  in  a  more 
florid  style. 

The  ornaments  of  these  openings  are  composed  in  a  man- 
ner which  appears  to  be  peculiar  to  this  region.  The  portal, 
(Fig.  82)  of  the  south  side,  for  instance,  has  the  mediaeval 
scheme  of  a  shafted  round  arch  of  two  orders  reproduced  in 
neo-classic  details,  with  an  entablature  for  a  lintel  passing 
through  the  imposts,  and  another  entablature  with  a  pediment 
placed  over  the  crown  of  the  arch  on  spandrels  in  relief.     To 


vm 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


145 


associate  the  entablature  with  the  arch  in  any  way  is  unreason- 
able, but  to  put  one  entablature  under  the  arch  and  another  one 
over  it  in  this  manner  is  childish  composition.    Yet  illogical  and 


Fk;.  82.  —  Portal  of  Como. 


puerile  as  the  scheme  is,  I  beHeve  it  is  derived  from  a  common 
form  of  Lombard  Romanesque  porch  which  is  entirely  reason- 
able in  design.     A  comparison  of   this  portal  with   the  porch 


146 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


of  San  Zeno  of  Verona  (Fig.  83)  will  illustrate  this.     In  San 
Zeno  we  have  a  sheltering  porch  and  a  portal,  and  each  is  rea- 


FlG.  83.  —  Porch  of  San  Zeno,  Verona. 

sonable  in  itself,  while  they  are  equally  reasonable  in  combina- 
tion. But  if  the  porch  were  eliminated,  with  exception  of  its 
facade,  and  this  facade  were  drawn  back  into  the  plane  of  the 


VIII 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


H7 


wall,  so  as  merely  to  frame  in  the  portal,  the  result  would  re- 
semble, in  composition  of  lines,  the  portal  of  Como,  and  would 


Fig.  84.  —  Portal  of  San  Pietro  in  Cielo  d'  Oro,  Pavia. 


be  as  illogical.  The  first,  or  encompassing,  order  of  the  portal 
of  Como  is  like  the  fagade  of  such  a  mediaeval  porch  wrought  in 
relief  against  the  wall  as  an  ornamental  framework.     For  the 


148 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


Lombard  columns  the  Renaissance  designer  has  substituted 
pilasters,  for  the  plain  lintel  an  entablature,  and  for  the  medi- 
aeval gable  a  classic  pediment  with  an  entablature. 

A  curious  instance  of  a  somewhat  similar  composition  of 
lines  in  a  Lombard  Romanesque  portal  without  an  overhang- 
ing porch  occurs  in  the  fagade  of  the  San  Pietro  in  Cielo  d'  Oro 
in  Pavia  (Fig.  84).  Here  the  arched  opening  is  flanked  by  tall 
engaged  shafts  which  carry  a  narrow  string  course  surmounted  by 
a  gable  over  the  crown  of  the  arch,  while  another  string  course, 
,  on    short    colonnettes   resting    on    the 

capitals  of  the  larger  shafts,  passes  over 
the  apex  of  the  gable.  But  in  this  case 
it  is  only  the  childish  association  of 
members  without  structural  meaning 
that  offends  the  eye.  There  is  no 
introduction  of  forms,  like  the  classic 
pilasters  and  entablatures  of  the  portal 
of  Como,  that  are  foreign  to  the  archi- 
tectural system. 

This  scheme,  with  various  modifica- 
tions, became  a  characteristic  one  in  the 
Lombard  and  Venetian  Renaissance,  and 
was  extensively  applied  to  windows,  as 
in  the  nave  of  the  same  cathedral  of 
Como.  The  windows  of  this  nave  are 
splayed,  and  are  flanked  with  pilasters 
from  the  capitals  of  which  their  archivolts 
spring,  while  in  some  of  them  diminutive 
pilasters  rise  from  the  same  capitals  and 
carry  an  entablature  and  pediment  over 
the  crown  of  the  arch  (Fig.  85). 
A  variety  of  forms  occur  in  these  openings  of  the  cathedral 
of  Como,  like  so  many  experiments  in  fanciful  composition  with- 
out any  basis  of  reason.  The  window,  for  instance,  of  the  bay 
adjoining  that  here  represented,  seems  to  show  that  the  designer 
felt  dissatisfied  with  the  small  pilaster  set  upon  the  larger  one, 
and  accordingly  omitted  it,  a  moulding  on  the  edge  of  the  span- 
drel, profiled  like  the  lower  member  of  the  crowning  entablature, 
taking  its  place.  But  again,  as  if  he  now  felt  that  the  entabla- 
ture required  a  more  architectural  support,  he  has  in  another 


Fig.  85.  —  Window  of  nave 
of  Como. 


VIII  CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE  149 

window  reproduced  the  small  pilaster,  but  instead  of  a  large 
single  one  below  he  has  employed  two  narrow  ones,  thus  giving 
separate  support  to  the  arch  and  the  entablature.  The  door- 
way on  the  north  side  of  the  nave  presents  a  further  modifica- 
tion of  the  scheme.  Here  the  jambs  and  the  arch  are  splayed 
as  before,  and  a  tall  column  of  the  ornamental  tapering  form, 
already  noticed  in  the  windows  of  the  Certosa  of  Pavia  and  in 
the  chapel  of  St.  Peter  Martyr,  is  set  on  either  side  of  the  com- 
position. This  portal,  like  the  one  on  the  south  side,  has  two 
entablatures  with  an  arch  between,  and  these  columns  reach 
to  the  upper  entablature  of  which  they  carry  ressauts.  No 
great  pediment  crowns  this  doorway,  but  a  tall  niche,  framed 
in  with  an  order  of  diminutive  pilasters  and  surmounted  with  a 
small  pediment,  rises  over  the  centre  of  the  upper  entablature. 
This  niche  shelters  a  statue  of  the  Virgin,  and  is  flanked  by 
a  statue  on  either  side.  Many  variants  of  this  ornamental 
scheme  for  door  and  window  occur  in  Lombardy  and  Venice, 
and  it  was  reproduced  in  many  other  parts  of  Italy,  occurring, 
as  we  have  seen,  even  in  Rome  as  in  the  palace  of  the  Cancel- 
leria  and  the  Palazzo  Torlonia. 

In  the  fifteenth  century,  as  in  the  Middle  Ages,  the  archi- 
tecture of  each  principal  locality  developed  peculiarities  of  style 
in  accordance  with  its  peculiar  tastes  and  conditions.  Thus 
the  Renaissance  design  of  Venice  has  a  general  character  of 
its  own,  though  it  drew  some  of  its  materials  from  Floren- 
tine and  Lombard  sources.  Michelozzi  had  followed  the  exiled 
Cosimo  de'  Medici  to  Venice,  and  Vasari  tells  us  ^  that  he  made 
there  many  drawings  and  models  for  private  dwellings  and 
public  buildings.  On  the  other  hand  a  family  of  architects 
and  sculptors  from  Lombardy,  known  as  the  Lombardi  (Pietro 
Lombardo  and  two  sons,  Santo  and  Tullio),  had  come  to  Venice 
in  the  fifteenth  century  and  introduced  features  from  the 
Lombard  Renaissance. 

Among  the  churches  of  the  Venetian  Renaissance  San 
Zaccaria  is  one  of  the  earliest,  and  its  interior  exhibits  a  singu- 
lar mixture  of  those  mediaeval  and  pseudo-classic  forms  of  which 
the  Italian  architects  produced  such  an  astonishing  variety. 
To  an  apse  with  a  half  dome  and  pseudo-Gothic  substructure 
is  joined  a  nave  of  three  square  bays,  the  first  of  which  is  cov- 

1  op.  cit.,  vol.  2,  p.  434. 


150 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


ered  with  a  dome  on  pendentives,  while  each  of  the  others  has 
a  plain  groined  vault.  These  vaults  spring  from  an  entablature 
which  crowns  the  great  arcade,  and  is  returned  on  the  ends  of 
the  building,  with  ressauts  on  corbels  at  the  imposts.  The  aisles 
have  oblong  groined  vaults  on  pointed  trans- 
verse arches  springing  from  corbels  on  the 
wall  side,  and  tied  with  iron  rods.  The 
main  proportions  conform  with  those  of  the 
so-called  Italian  Gothic  churches,  the  great 
arcades  of  the  nave,  and  consequently  the 
aisle  vaulting,  being  relatively  very  high. 
The  most  singular  feature  of  this  interior  is 
the  column  (Fig.  86)  of  nondescript  char- 
acter, and  a  variant  of  the  tapering  Lombard 
Renaissance  shaft  of  Pavia  and  Como.  It 
consists  of  a  shaft  of  pseudo-Corinthian  form 
raised  on  a  high  octagonal  pedestal,  with  a 
very  wide  and  richly  moulded  base. 

The  church  of  San  Salvatore,  dating  from 
the  close  of  the  fifteenth  century,  and  attrib- 
uted to  the  architect  Tullio  Lombard©, 
though  begun  by  Spavento,^  has  a  modified 
Byzantine  structural  scheme  applied  to  a  long 
nave  with  three  domes  on  pendentives  sepa- 
rated by  short  sections  of  barrel  vaulting.  The 
supports  (Fig.  87)  of  this  vaulting  are  peculiar, 
and  are  like  the  piers  of  the  nave  of  St. 
Andrea  of  Mantua  modified  by  piercing  them 
both  transversely  and  longitudinally  so  as  to 
leave  four  slender  solid  parts  at  the  angles 
(two  of  which  are  engaged  in  the  aisle  wall), 
the  void  being  covered  with  a  diminutive 
dome  on  pendentives.  The  plan  of  the  struc- 
ture as  a  whole  suggests  this  comparison 
with  St.  Andrea,  but  the  character  of  the 
supports  suggests  their  derivation  from  the  piers  of  the  church 
of  St.  Mark.  These  last  are  square  masses  of  masonry  pierced 
longitudinally  and  transversely  so  as  to  leave  four  heavy  solids 
as  in  Figure  88,  the  void  in   this  case  being  covered  with  a 

^  Melani,  Architettura  Italiana,  vol.  2,  p.  154. 


Fig.  86. 


CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE 


151 


Fig.  87. 


Fig.  88. 


diminutive  groined  vault.  In  San  Salvatore  the  solids  are 
greatly  reduced  in  volume,  and  are  faced  with  neo-classic  pilas- 
ters, above  which  the  pier  is  solid,  and  is  faced  with  an  entab- 
lature surmounted  by  an  attic  from  which  the  vaulting  springs. 
The  use  of  an  attic  in  an  interior,  and  especially  as  a  support  for 
vaulting,  is  one  of  those  architectural  aberrations  with  which  the 
Renaissance  has  made  us  familiar.  I  know  not  when  or  where  it 
first  occurred,  but  there  can  be  few  earlier  instances  than  this.  It 
was  not  seldom  introduced  by  the  architects  of  the  later  Renais- 
sance, and,  as  we 
shall  see,  by  Sir 
Christopher  Wren 
in  St.  Paul's  cathe- 
dral. It  is  worthy 
of  notice  that  the 
system  of  San  Sal- 
vatore is  that  of 
the  church  of  St. 
Mark  modified  by 
lightening  the  piers  in  the  way  that  we  have  seen,  and  by  the 
application  of  neo-classic  details. 

The  nearly  contemporaneous  church  of  S.  Fantino  has  the 
same  general  character,  except  that  groined  vaulting  takes  the 
place  of  domes  on  pendentives  in  all  but  the  easternmost  com- 
partment of  the  nave,  and  the  attic  story  is  omitted. 

No  work  of  the  early  Renaissance  in  north  Italy  exhibits 
more  refinement  in  its  details  than  the  small  church  of  Santa 
Maria  dei  Miracoli  in  Venice,  the  design  of  which  is  ascribed 
to  Pietro  Lombardo  (Fig.  89).  The  plan  is  a  simple  rectangle 
with  a  rectangular  sanctuary.  The  plain  walls  of  the  nave  are 
covered  with  a  round  timber  roof,  and  the  sanctuary  has  a  small 
dome  on  pendentives.  The  interior  is  richly  incrusted  with 
marble  and  relief  carvings  of  the  utmost  delicacy,  and  of  un- 
usual beauty  of  design.  The  walls  of  the  exterior  are  divided 
into  two  stages  by  superimposed  orders  of  pilasters  on  podiums. 
The  pilasters  of  the  upper  order  carry  archivolts  instead  of  an 
entablature,  thus  recalling  the  mediaeval  Lombard  bhnd  arcade, 
and  the  walls  above  this  are  crowned  with  an  entablature.  Over 
the  portal  a  curved  pediment  is  set  against  the  entablature  of  the 
lower  order,   and   the  whole  facade  is  crowned  with  a   semi- 


152  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  REISTAISSANCE  chap. 

circular  pediment  pierced  with  a  large  round  opening  and  five 
smaller  ones  ranged  on  its  semicircumference.     The  wail  sur- 


FiG.  89.  —  Santa  Maria  dei  Miracoli,  Venice. 

faces  are  incrusted  with  marble  panelling  set  with  disks  and 
lesser  panels  of  cruciform  and  rectangular  shapes  in  faintly 
coloured  marbles,  and^the  whole  building  is  a  marvel  of  excel- 


vm  CHURCH  ARCHITECTURE  153 

lence  in  mechanical  execution.  But  the  use  of  the  inappro- 
priate superimposed  orders  falsifies  the  design  by  giving  it 
the  appearance  of  two  stories  while  in  reality  it  has  only  one. 

The  facade  of  Santa  Maria  Formosa  exhibits  another  phase 
of  early  Renaissance  design  in  Venice.  This  fagade  is  notice- 
able as  reproducing  some  of  the  larger  features  of  Alberti's 
west  front  of  St.  Andrea  of  Mantua  with  details  having  the 
character  of  the  works  of  the  Lombardi.  The  great  central 
arch  of  St.  Andrea  is  omitted  here,  and  the  existing  portal  is 
an  alteration  of  a  later  time  in  a  style  that  does  not  agree  with 
the  rest  of  the  design.  The  three  compartments  into  which  the 
front  is  divided  are  treated  as  sunk  panels  flanked  by  half  pilas- 
ters set  against  the  larger  ones,  over  which  last  the  entablature 
is  broken  into  ressauts.  In  each  lateral  compartment  over  a 
podium  connecting  the  high  pedestals  on  which  the  pilasters 
are  raised  is  an  opening  of  the  Lombard  type.  The  main  lines 
of  the  composition  correspond  with  the  internal  divisions  of 
the  building,  except  that  the  entablature  of  the  order,  which  is 
carried  across  the  entire  front,  divides  the  nave  compartment 
into  two  stages. 

The  foregoing  examples  are  enough  to  show  the  leading 
characteristics  of  the  church  architecture  of  the  early  Renais- 
sance in  north  Italy.  In  the  later  period  the  local  peculiarities 
give  place  for  the  most  part  to  the  measurably  uniform  style 
of  which  Vignola  and  Palladio  were  the  leading  masters,  and 
which  has  been  already  considered  under  the  heading  of  Church 
Architecture  of  the  Roman  Renaissance. 


CHAPTER   IX 

PALACE    ARCHITECTURE    OF    THE    RENAISSANCE    IN    NORTH    ITALY 

The  palace  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  in  north  Italy 
which  has  the  most  marked  local  character  is  that  of  Venice. 
We  have  already,  in  the  preceding  chapter,  noticed  several 
buildings  here  by  Sansovino,  but  these  belong  to  the  later  Ro- 
man Renaissance  style,  and  are  thus  not  so  distinctly  Venetian. 
Several  civic  monuments,  however,  and  many  houses  of  the 
Grand  Canal  and  elsewhere,  exhibit  the  peculiar  Venetian  type. 
Among  the  earliest  and  most  noteworthy  of  these  is  the  east 
side  of  the  Court  of  the  Ducal  Palace  by  the  architect  Antonio 
Riccio  of  Verona.^  This  richly  ornamental  scheme  is  wrought 
upon  a  foundation  of  earlier  work  to  which  the  architect 
was  obliged  to  conform,  and  this  appears  to  have  given  rise  to 
the  irregular  magnitudes  and  spacings  of  the  openings  of  the 
upper  stories,  which  are  so  noticeable,  and  are  in  marked  contrast 
with  the  symmetrical  regularity  of  Renaissance  design  in  gen- 
eral. The  long  fagade  is  in  two  walled  stories  above  a  base- 
ment in  two  stages  of  open  arcading,  with  the  so-called  giant's 
stairway  giving  access  to  the  upper  arcade.  The  ground  story 
has  splayed  round  arches  on  piers  of  corresponding  section 
adorned  with  pilasters  of  neo-classic  form,  while  the  stage  above 
has  a  pointed  arcade  on  compound  shafted  supports  of  mediae- 
val Venetian  character  (Plate  VI).  The  upper  stories  are  marked 
by  entablatures,  and  the  round-arched  windows  are  flanked  by 
pilasters  reaching,  in  the  principal  story,  to  the  arch  impost, 
and  then  stilted  to  carry  curved  pediments  worked  in  relief 
against  the  entablature  that  crowns  this  story.  The  top  story 
is  divided  into  two  parts  of  nearly  equal  length,  but  of  differ- 
ent height,  and  different  design.  The  part  extending  from  the 
middle  to  the  sea  side  of  the  court  is  the  lower,  and  has  its 
windows  flanked  by  pilasters  reaching  to  the  crowning  entabla- 

^  Cf.  Architettura  Italiana,  by  Alfredo  Melani,  Milan,  1887,  vol.  2,  p.  157. 

154 


CHAP.   IX 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


155 


ture.  These  pilasters  are  raised  on  pedestals  forming  ressauts 
to  a  podium,  and  some  of  the  windows  are  grouped  in  pairs,  some 
in  double  pairs,  and  some  are  single.  In  the  taller  part  the 
windows  are  taller,  and  show  considerable  differences  of  design. 
One  group,  consisting  of  a  double  pair,  has  flanking  pilasters 
reaching  only  to  the  impost,  with  a  stilt- 
block  rising  from  the  capital  of  each  to 
the  crowning  entablature,  while  Corinthian 
colonnettes,  with  strongly  marked  entasis, 
support  the  archivolts  —  both  pilasters 
and  shafts  being  raised  on  low  pedestals. 
Separated  from  this  by  a  considerable  inter- 
val is  another  window  group  of  the  same 
design,  but  consisting  of  a  single  pair,  while 
in  the  intervening  space,  and  along  the  rest 
of  the  wall  toward  the  church  of  St.  Mark, 
are  unequally  spaced  single  windows  with 
pilasters  supporting  the  archivolts,  and 
other  pilasters  flanking  these,  all  raised  on 
high  pedestals  connected  by  a  continuous 
podium.  In  the  upper  stage  of  the  base- 
ment, at  the  head  of  the  giant's  stair,  the 
pointed  arcade  is  interrupted  by  a  group 
of  three  round  arches  on  grouped  pilasters. 
The  wall  surfaces  are  everywhere  elabo- 
rately panelled  and  enriched  with  ara- 
besques, and  the  friezes,  spandrels,  and 
podiums  have  panelled  disks,  festoons,  and  ^ 
arabesque  ornaments  in  tiresome  profusion. 
The  north  side  is  also  in  the  Renaissance 
style,  but  here  is  only  one  enclosed  story, 
and  this  is  on  the  level  of  the  upper  arcade  ''  "-^^^'p-X 
of  the  east  side.  The  architectural  scheme 
of  this  part  is  different,  except  that  its  en- 
tablature is  a  continuation  of  the  lower  one  of  the  eastern 
facade.  The  work  here  appears  to  have  been  wholly  new, 
and  the  regularly  spaced  windows  are  each  framed  with  a 
pseudo-Corinthian  order  in  high  relief,  the  shafts  of  this  order 
being  raised  on  ornamented  round  pedestals  resting  on  corbel- 
blocks  (Fig.  90).     The  walls  are  incrusted  with  large  slabs  of 


Fig.  90, 


IS6  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

veined  marble,  and  an  ornamental  disk  in  relief  is  set  in  each 
interspace. 

The  finest  thing  in  this  court  is  the  giant's  stair.  Few  archi- 
tectural works  of  the  Renaissance  are  so  reasonable  and  so  free 
from  superfluous  and  unmeaning  features.  The  steps,  broken 
about  midway  by  a  landing  stage,  are  enclosed  by  balustrades 
of  severely  simple  design  starting  from  square  newels  ;  and  the 
sides  are  plainly  panelled  in  marble,  with  delicate  mouldings 
and  arabesque  carvings  on  the  surfaces  of  the  framing  mem- 
bers. The  mechanical  execution  of  the  whole  is  superb,  no 
settlement  or  fracture  appearing  in  any  part. 

The  facade  of  the  Scuola  di  San  Marco,  begun  in  1485  and 
attributed  to  the  architect  Martino  Lombardo,  is  a  marvel  of 
delicate  workmanship  resembling  in  many  of  its  features  the 
small  church  of  the  Miracole  (p.  151)  while  including  details  of  a 
different  character.  It  is  in  two  stories,  and  is  divided  into  two 
parts,  answering  to  an  internal  division,  one  of  which,  em- 
bracing the  main  portal,  is  larger  and  richer  than  the  other. 
An  order  of  Corinthian  pilasters  embraces  both  parts  of  each 
story,  and  these  pilasters  are  unequally  spaced  in  conformity 
with  the  proportions  of  the  respective  parts  and  their  openings. 
The  main  division,  which  is  on  the  spectator's  left  as  he  faces 
the  building,  has  three  bays  of  which  the  central  one  is  the 
wider.  The  main  portal  (Fig.  91)  is  in  this  bay,  and  has  two 
arch  orders  on  pilasters  flanked  with  larger  pilasters,  also  in  two 
orders,  reaching  to  the  entablature  which  passes  over  the  arch. 
A  free-standing  Corinthian  column  on  a  high  pedestal  is  set  in 
front  of  each  pilaster  of  the  greater  suborder,  and  from  res- 
sauts  of  the  entablature  over  these  columns  an  archivolt  in  high 
relief  is  sprung  against  the  wall  of  the  upper  story.  The  shafts 
of  the  flanking  columns  are  unusually  short,  the  pedestals  being 
about  half  the  total  height  from  the  ground  to  the  entablature. 
Comment  on  the  unreason  of  such  compositions' becomes  weari- 
some, and  criticism  may  appear  like  captiousness.  But  if  the 
reader  will  consider  the  character  of  a  Greek  portal,  with  its 
jamb  mouldings  and  cornice,  as  reasonable  and  appropriate  as 
they  are  simple,  of  a  true  Gothic  doorway  with  its  consistent 
arch  orders,  but  with  no  superfluous  or  unmeaning  features,  he 
can  hardly  fail  to  feel  the  childishness  of  this  Renaissance  de- 
sign in  comparison. 


IX 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


157 


The  other  division  of  this  front  has  a  smaller  and   more 
simple  doorway  in  its  central  bay,  with  an  unbroken  wall  above, 


Fig.  91.  —  Portal  of  the  Scuola  di  San  Marco,  Venice, 


and  a  narrow  arched  window,  framed  with  pilasters  and  a  gabled 
pediment  in  each  upper  lateral  bay,  while  the  lateral  compart- 
ments of  the  ground  story  are  adorned  with  remarkable  carv- 


158 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


ings  in  very  low  relief  which  present  an  extreme  instance  of 
that  tendency  to  pictorial  treatment  that  distinguishes  the  re- 
lief sculpture  of  the  Renaissance.  The  main  cornice,  embrac- 
ing both  divisions  of  the  front, 
is  crowned  with  a  series  of 
arched  pediments,  varying  in 
span  with  the  bays  beneath, 
which  recall  those  of  the 
facade  of  the  church  of  St. 
Mark.  Those  over  the  main 
division  of  the  fagade  are  raised 
on  ornamental  attics  of  which 
the  middle  one  is  in  two  stages. 
The  details  of  this  composi- 
tion are  in  very  low  relief,  and 
the  entablatures  are  broken 
into  slight  ressauts  over  the 
pilasters.  The  wall  surfaces 
are  incrusted  with  marble 
slabs,  with  simple  panellings 
and  small  disks  introduced 
sparingly,  and  the  archivolts 
of  the  main  portal,  and  of 
the  crowning  pediments,  are 
adorned  with  arabesques  and 
with  small  statues  and  finials. 
The  merit  of  this  composi- 
tion as  a  whole  lies  solely  in 
the  ordering  of  the  component 
details  which  the  designer  has 
employed  in  a  purely  fanciful 
way  without  any  proper  archi- 
tectural meaning ;  but  the  re- 
finement of  execution,  and  the 

FiG.92.-PanoftheScuoladiSanRocco.  ^eauty   of   the    marbles,    with 

their  pearly  colours  subdued 
and  harmonized  by  time,  make  the  monument  one  of  the  most 
notable  in  Venice. 

Another  characteristic  example  of  early  Renaissance  design 
in  Venice  is  the  Scuola  di  San  Rocco  (Fig.  92).     The  facade 


IX  PALACE  ARCHITECTURE  159 

of  this  building  is  again  in  two  divisions  each  of  two  stories,  the 
main  division  having  three  bays  and  the  other  but  two.  These 
bays  are  marked  by  superimposed  pilasters  which  are  carried 
across  both  divisions,  and  in  the  main  division  a  free-standing 
Corinthian  column  is  set  in  front  of  each  pilaster.  In  each 
story  the  columns  are  raised  on  pedestals  connected  by  a 
podium,  and  each  one  is  wreathed  with  a  band  of  ornamental 
foliage.  The  entablatures  are  in  the  plane  of  the  waH,  and 
are  broken  into  very  salient  ressauts  which  in  the  main  cornice 
are  unpleasantly  conspicuous  against  the  sky.  Both  the  col- 
umns and  the  ressauts  are  meaningless,  the  columns  having 
nothing  but  the  ressauts  to  carry,  and  the  ressauts  having  no 
function  but  to  cover  the  useless  columns.  The  lesser  details 
of  this  fagade  are  of  mixed  character.  The  main  portal  has 
splayed  jambs  adorned  with  pilasters,  and  an  archivolt  of  cor- 
responding section.  This  portal  is  framed  by  an  order  of 
smaller  Corinthian  columns,  on  high  polygonal  pedestals,  with 
a  pediment  over  the  entablature.  The  side  bays  of  the  base- 
ment of  the  main  division  have  each  a  wide  arched  window 
subdivided  by  a  central  colonnette  and  jamb  shafts  carrying 
two  small  arches,  with  a  tympanum  pierced  with  a  circle  and 
triangles  in  mediaeval  fashion.  The  great  arches  of  these 
windows  have  spandrels  in  relief  crowned  with  cornices  in  the 
Lombard  Renaissance  manner.  In  the  upper  story  each  bay 
has  a  pair  of  arched  windows  framed  by  a  pseudo-Corinthian 
order  of  colonnettes  on  ornamented  round  pedestals  resting  on 
corbels,  the  entablature  of  this  diminutive  order  being  sur- 
mounted by  a  pediment.  In  the  window  of  the  central  bay  the 
pier  between  the  openings  is  wider  than  the  piers  of  the  side 
windows,  and  has  a  pair  of  colonnettes  on  its  face  instead  of 
only  one. 

But  the  most  characteristic  architecture  of  the  Renaissance 
in  Venice  is  that  of  the  private  palaces  of  the  grand  canal. 
The  princely  dwellings  ranged  along  this  unique  waterway  are 
unmatched  by  anything  else  in  the  world.  The  finest  of  them 
are,  however,  those  of  the  later  mediaeval  period.  These  alone 
have  the  thoroughly  distinctive  Venetian  character;  but  a  few 
of  the  palaces  of  the  early  Renaissance  retain  the  fine  propor- 
tions, the  quiet  outlines,  and  the  expression  of  refined  opulence 
that  belong  to  the  buildings  of  the  preceding  epoch.     In  the 


i6o  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

best  of  them  the  neo-classic  details  are  used  sparingly,  though 
not  without  strange  new  inconsistencies  of  form  and  adjustment. 
The  Palazzo  Corner-Spinelli  (Plate  VII),  attributed  to  Pietro 
Lombardo,  is  one  of  the  most  characteristic.  Its  broad-walled 
basement,  and  the  well-ordered  subdivisions  of  the  upper  stories, 
are  exceedingly  fine,  though  the  basement  is  high  and  the  prin- 
cipal story  rather  low.  No  complete  orders  occur  in  this  facade, 
but  superimposed  pilasters  are  placed  on  the  angles,  and  an 
entablature  is  carried  across  each  of  the  upper  stories,  while 
only  a  narrow  string  course  crowns  the  basement.  The  win- 
dows are  disposed  in  the  manner  of  those  of  the  mediaeval 
Venetian  palaces,  a  pair  of  them  being  set  together  in  the 
middle,  and  a  single  one  occupying  the  centre  of  each  lateral 
bay  in  conformity  with  the  divisions  of  the  interior.  These 
windows  are  wide,  and  are  composed  in  the  mediaeval  manner, 
with  a  dividing  shaft  and  two  small  arches  encompassed  by  a 
larger  arch,  as  in  the  Scuola  di  San  Rocco.  A  noticeable 
peculiarity  of  detail  in  these  windows  is  the  incomplete  circle 
in  the  tympanum  space,  which  intersects  the  smaller  arches  so 
as  to  form  sinuous  curves  like  those  of  Flamboyant  Gothic 
tracery.  The  archivolts  are  carried  by  small  pilasters,  and  the 
spandrels  are  framed  with  mouldings.  The  windows  open  on 
corbelled  balconies  with  balustrades  in  Renaissance  form  of 
great  refinement  and  elegance,  and  the  balcony  rails  are  car- 
ried as  string  courses  along  the  walls.  The  panelling  of  the 
pilasters,  as  in  this  design  and  many  others  that  we  have  noticed 
beginning  with  Alberti's  fagade  of  St.  Andrea  of  Mantua,  is  of 
questionable  propriety,  for  supporting  members  need  to  have  an 
expression  of  concentrated  strength  with  which  such  treatment 
is  hardly  compatible.  The  surface  of  a  pier  or  pilaster  may  be 
enriched  by  any  kind  of  fluting  or  chasing  that  does  not  mate- 
rially diminish  its  substance,  but  to  sink  panels  in  such  sup- 
porting members  is  to  destroy  in  a  measure  the  expression  of 
homogeneous  compactness.  The  classic  details  in  this  building 
show  the  same  disregard  for  correct  classic  forms  and  propor- 
tions that  we  find  in  the  art  of  the  Renaissance  generally. 
The  superimposed  pilasters  on  the  angles  are  of  uniform  width, 
though  they  differ  greatly  in  height,  and  those  of  the  various 
openings  are  of  still  different  proportions  and  sizes.  This  asso- 
ciation of   members  of   the  same  kind,  but  of  many  different 


Plate  VR 


t=>aukzzo  corner- SPINELLI 
Venice 


IX  PALACE  ARCHITECTURE  i6i 

magnitudes,  is  proper  to  the  organic  mediaeval  architectural 
systems,  under  the  influence  of  which  these  designers  were  un- 
consciously working ;  but  it  is  foreign  to  the  principles  of  the 
classic  art.  The  beauty  of  the  Corner  palace,  is,  however,  quite 
independent  of  the  neo-classic  details  which  are  sparingly  in- 
grafted upon  it,  and  belongs  to  the  larger  forms  and  proportions 
of  the  mediaeval  Venetian  style. 

Other  Venetian  palaces  of  the  early  Renaissance  exhibit 
other  peculiarities  which  it  would  be  tedious  to  describe  at 
length,  but  it  may  be  well  to  notice  a  few  of  them.  The  Palazzo 
Contarini,  for  instance,  has  its  three  principal  interior  divisions 
marked  by  superimposed  pilasters  in  addition  to  the  pilasters  on 
the  angles.  The  basement  order  is  raised  on  a  podium,  and  both 
the  basement  and  the  principal  story  have  an  entablature,  while  the 
top  story  is  crowned  with  a  low  cornice  with  modillions  and 
no  complete  entablature.  The  arched  portal  is  flanked  with 
pilasters  in  two  orders,  both  crowned  with  entablature  blocks, 
but  no  entablature  spans  the  opening  under  the  arch,  and  the 
spandrels  are  framed  with  mouldings  and  crowned  with  a  cor- 
nice. The  windows  are  narrow  and  round  arched,  and  have  no 
dividing  members.  Four  of  these  are  grouped  together  in  the 
central  bay  of  each  upper  story,  and  those  of  the  principal 
story  are  framed  in  with  a  Corinthian  order  of  five  columns 
surmounted  by  a  pediment,  the  whole  composition  having 
exactly  the  form  of  a  diminutive  temple  front.  Each  lateral 
bay  above  the  basement  has  two  single  windows,  those  of  the 
principal  floor  being  each  framed  with  a  Corinthian  order  like 
that  of  the  central  group,  and  crowned  with  a  pediment.  The 
windows  of  the  top  story  are  flanked  by  very  slender  pilasters 
of  equal  height  with  those  of  the  main  order,  and  smaller  pilas- 
ters carry  the  archivolts.  The  end  windows  of  the  central 
group  and  the  inner  ones  of  the  lateral  bays  come  close  to  the 
pilasters  of  the  main  order,  thus  giving  on  each  side  a  group  of 
pilasters  of  three  different  proportions  and  magnitudes,  as  in 
Figure  93.  The  front  as  a  whole  is  good  in  its  proportions,  and 
quiet  in  effect.  The  neo-classic  details  add  nothing  to  it  of 
value,  and  the  composition  would  be  better  without  them. 

The  Palazzo  Vendramini  has  full  orders  in  all  three  stories, 
and  the  distinctive  Venetian  character  is  materially  altered  by 
them.      The   usual   scheme  of    the  Venetian  palace  front,    in 


1 62 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


which  a  wide  central  bay  wholly  occupied  by  openings  is 
flanked  by  lateral  bays  each  with  a  solid  wall  on  either  side  of  an 
opening,  is  indeed  retained,  but  the  effect  of  it  is  much  obscured 
by  the  prominence  given  to  the  orders,  which  are  in  high  relief, 
and  extend  across  the  whole  front.  The  openings  have  the 
mediaeval  form  of  two  shafted  arches  beneath  an  embracing 
arch  with  a  circle  in  the  tympanum  space.  Three,  instead  of 
two,  of  these  compound  openings  are  grouped  within  the 
unusually  wide  central  bay,  and  each  one  fills  an  intercolumnia- 
tion  of  the  order.     In  each  lateral  bay  the  columns  of  the  order 

are  unequally  spaced  in  con- 
formity with  the  narrow  strips 
of  solid  wall,  one  on  either 
side  of  the  opening,  which 
they  enclose,  giving  a  wide 
central  intercolumniation  and 
two  narrow  ones.  The  cor- 
nice of  the  basement  en- 
tablature is  widened,  and 
supported  on  corbels  from 
the  frieze,  in  front  of  the 
windows  of  the  principal 
story,  and  balustrades  are  set 
on  these  projecting  ledges  so 
as  to  form  balconies.  To  give 
emphasis  to  the  topmost  en- 
tablature as  the  crowning 
feature  of  the  facade,  it  is 
made  so  high  as  to  be  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  order  of 
which  it  is  a  part. 

Of  the  later  palace  architecture  of  Venice  it  is  unnecessary 
to  give  any  extended  analysis  because  it  is  less  distinctly  Vene- 
tian, and  belongs  more  fully  to  the  so-called  Roman  Renais- 
sance style  which  is  essentially  uniform  in  character  in  all  parts 
of  the  country.  In  these  later  palace  fronts  the  main  divisions 
of  the  typical  Venetian  scheme  persist  indeed,  but  they  are  so 
slightly  emphasized,  and  so  overladen  with  heavy  orders,  that 
they  lose  their  proper  effect.  In  Sansovino's  Palazzo  Cornaro, 
for  instance,  already  described  (p.  124),  these  main  divisions  of 
the  front  are  hardly  noticeable  in  a  general  view.     The  general 


Fig.  93. 


IX  PALACE  ARCHITECTURE  163 

effect  is  of  evenly  spaced  pairs  of  columns  in  each  of  the  upper 
stories.  It  is  not  until  we  examine  the  composition  closely  that 
we  perceive  the  narrower  proportions  of  the  three  middle  open- 
ings. The  same  is  true  of  the  facade  of  the  Palazzo  Grimani 
by  Sanmichele,  though  in  this  case  the  grouping  is  different, 
the  columns  being  set  in  pairs  in  the  lateral  bays  only.  Even 
in  the  still  later  and  heavy  rococo  design  of  the  Palazzo  Pesaro 
by  the  architect  Longhena,  which  is  based  on  the  scheme  of  the 
Library  of  St.  Mark,  the  unequal  main  divisions  of  the  Venetian 
palace  type  are  still  preserved. 

Among  examples  of  north  Italian  Renaissance  palace  archi- 
tecture outside  of  Venice  the  well-known  Palazzo  del  Consiglio  of 
Verona  (Plate  VIII)  presents  a  mediaeval  broletto  scheme  dressed 
out  in  Renaissance  details  which  it  would  be  better  without. 
The  building  has  but  one  story  over  an  open  arcaded  basement. 
The  arcade  is  in  two  divisions  of  four  arches  each,  the  arches 
springing  from  short  columns  raised  on  square  pedestals,  and 
the  pedestals  connected  by  a  balustrade.  A  central  pier  and 
a  pier  at  each  end  enclose  these  divisions,  and  on  the  face  of 
each  pier  is  a  shallow  pilaster  supporting  a  narrow  entablature 
which  extends  across  the  whole  front,  with  a  corbelled  capital 
over  the  central  column  of  each  division  to  support  the  entabla- 
ture in  the  long'  intervals  between  the  pilasters.  The  upper 
story  is  divided  into  four  equal  parts  by  pilasters  set  over  the 
pilasters  and  corbels  of  the  basement.  These  pilasters  are  on 
ressauts  of  a  podium  over  corresponding  ressauts  in  the  entabla- 
ture below,  and  the  crowning  entablature  is  hkewise  broken  with 
ressauts.  A  twin-arched  opening  with  central  colonnette,  flanked 
by  pilasters  and  crowned  with  an  entablature  and  curved  pedi- 
ment, occupies  the  middle  of  each  division  of  this  story,  and  the 
walls  are  incrusted  with  elaborate  marble  inlay.  The  general 
form  and  proportions  of  this  monument  are  exceedingly  fine, 
but  in  respect  to  these  qualities  it  belongs  to  the  Middle  Ages 
and  not  to  the  Renaissance.  To  the  simple  arcade  and  plain 
walled  superstructure  the  neo-classic  details  are  inappropriate 
and  meaningless. 

Another  northern  Renaissance  building  of  the  broletto  type 
is  the  Palazzo  Comunale  of  Brescia,  in  which  we  have  a  base- 
ment arcade  of  three  arches  on  heavy  piers,  with  an  engaged 
Corinthian  order  adjusted  in  the  Roman  manner,  and  over  this 


164 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


a  single  story  in  retreat  divided  into  three  wide  bays  by  pilasters 
carrying  a  heavy  entablature.  A  square-headed  window  in  each 
bay  is  framed  by  an  order  of  smaller  pilasters  the  entablature 
of  which   reaches  to   the   soffit  of   the  crowning  entablature. 


Fig.  94.  —  One  bay  of  basement  of  the  Ospedale  Maggiore. 


In  those  parts  of  the  Ospedale  Maggiore  of  Milan  which 
were  designed  about  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century,  by 
the  Florentine  architect,  Antonio  Filarete,  the  larger  features 
are  of  mixed  and  debased  mediaeval  character  with  .no  applica- 


IX 


PALACE  ARCHITECTURE 


i6s 


tion  of  classic  orders.  The  building  is  of  brick  with  elaborate 
ornaments  of  terra-cotta,  and  has  but  two  stories  including  the 
basement.  The  basement  has  a  blind  arcade  of  round  arches 
on  stumpy  columns  with  Corinthianesque  capitals,  and  a  com- 
pound opening  of  two  pointed  arches  under  a  larger  pointed 
arch  is  set  in  each  bay  (Fig.  94).  The  faces  of  the  jambs  and 
archivolts  of  these  openings  are  heavily  adorned  with  mouldings 
and  foliate  ornaments  in  terra-cotta  relief,  while  the  archivolts 
of  the  arcade  above  have  more  simple  neo-classic  profiling,  and 
more  refined  and  conventional  foliate 
ornamentation.  The  window-sills  are  on 
coupled  corbels  of  heavy  and  inelegant 
form,  and  the  whole  arcade  is  raised  on  a 
high  base  with  ressauts  under  the  col- 
umns. Medallions  with  busts  in  high 
relief  are  set  in  the  tympanums  of  the 
windows  and  in  the  spandrels  of  the 
arcade,  while  a  wide  frieze  somewhat  like 
an  entablature  crowns  this  part  of  the 
composition.  The  upper  story  has  a  plain 
brick  wall  with  windows  like  those  of  the 
basement  enclosed  within  rectangular 
panels. 

Other  peculiarities  of  design  are  found 
in  some  of  the  early  Renaissance  palaces 
of  Bologna,  where  in  the  Palazzo  Bevil- 
acqua  the  windows  of  the  principal  story 
have  the  mediaeval  form  of  two  small 
arches  under  a  larger  arch,  modified  by 
the  omission  of  the  central  shaft  which  gives  the  middle  of  the 
tympanum  the  form  of  a  pendant.  But  it  is  not  worth  while  to 
follow  these  aberrations  of  early  northern  Renaissance  design 
further.  The  palace  architecture  of  the  later  Renaissance  in 
north  Italy  has  no  distinctive  character  that  calls  for  particular 
comment.  It  is  for  the  most  part  based  on  the  art  of  Palladio 
and  Vignola  which  we  have  already  enough  considered.  While 
it  exhibits  many  more  of  those  misadjustments  of  structural 
members,  and  other  vagaries  of  design,  in  which  Italian  archi- 
tects have  been  at  all  times  fertile,  it  has  no  great  importance  to 
justify  special  remark.     To  point  out  in  detail  many  such  mean- 


FiG.  95. 


l66  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE        chap,  ix 

ingless  caprices  as  those  introduced  by  Pellegrini  in  the  court  of 
the  Palazzo  Brera  in  Milan,  where  the  arches  of  the  superim- 
posed arcades  are  sprung  from  pairs  of  columns  connected 
by  short  entablatures,  making  it  necessary  to  double  the 
transverse  arches  of  the  vaulting  behind  them,  or  such  novel- 
ties as  occur  in  the  windows  of  the  basement  of  the  Palazzo 
Martinengo  of  Brescia,  which  are  adorned  with  small  Doric 
columns  carrying  architraves  without  the  other  parts  of  an 
entablature,  while  an  upright  block  with  a  ball  on  it  rises  over 
each  column  (Fig.  95),  would  be  tiresome  and  profitless.  We 
may  therefore  pass  on  in  the  next  chapter  to  a  brief  considera- 
tion of  the  carved  ornament  of  this  architecture,  before  taking 
up  the  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  in  France  and  England. 


CHAPTER   X 

ARCHITECTURAL    CARVING    OF    THE    RENAISSANCE 

All  effective  sculpture  on  buildings,  including  that  of  the 
human  figure,  is  architectural  carving ;  but  it  is  in  Gothic  art 
only  that  sculpture  of  the  human  figure,  as  well  as  that  of  sub- 
ordinate ornamentation  made  up  of  the  other  elements,  has  at 
once  an  appropriate  architectural  character  and  a  high  degree 
of  excellence  in  the  development  of  form.  In  the  best  Greek 
art  the  carving  of  the  human  figure  has,  indeed,  a  grandly  mon- 
umental quality ;  but  the  Greek  sculptor  did  not  seek  primarily 
to  give  his  work  an  architectural  expression.  He  wrought 
it  with  a  kind  of  perfection  that  is  not  compatible  with  the  fullest 
measure  of  such  expression.  Greek  sculpture,  though  placed 
on  a  building,  is  in  a  measure  independent  of  it,  and  thus  it  not 
only  loses  nothing,  but  may  even  gain  in  value,  when  taken  from 
its  place  on  the  building  and  set  up  in  a  museum  where  it  can 
be  viewed  by  itself. 

In  the  art  of  the  Renaissance  the  human  figure  in  the  full 
round  is  treated  so  independently  as  to  lose  nearly  all  monu- 
mental expression,  while  for  strictly  architectural  carving  we 
have  reliefs  on  pilasters,  friezes,  and  capitals,  made  up  of 
scrolls  and  meanders  with  leafage,  grotesque  animal  life,  and 
a  great  variety  of  objects,  including  the  human  figure,  repre- 
sented more  or  less  fantastically  as  ornament.  Renaissance 
sculpture  of  the  human  figure  thus  having  so  little  proper 
architectural  character,  we  shall  not  consider  it  here,  but  con- 
fine our  attention  to  the  relief  carving,  which  has  a  closer  archi- 
tectural connection,  if  not  a  much  truer  architectural  expression. 

A  great  deal  of  this  carving  is  in  close  imitation  of  Roman 
models,  as  a  comparison  of  a  fragment  of  Roman  arabesque 
from  the  Museum  of  Florence  (Fig.  96)  with  a  fragment  of 
Renaissance  arabesque  from  the  Ducal  Palace  of  Gubbio  (Fig. 
97)  will  show.     But  in  elegance,  delicacy,  and  subtlety  of  line 

167 


i68 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 


and  surface,  the  best  carving  of  the  Renaissance  is  superior  to 
that  of   ancient    Rome.      The   linear   basis  of  such  design   is 


Fig.  96.  —  Roman  Arabesque. 

highly  artificial,  consisting  of  formal  scrolls  and  meanders,  and 
the  leafage  and  other  forms  introduced  are  treated  artificially 
without  being  finely  conventionalized.     The  conventions  of  this 


ARCHITECTURAL   CARVING 


169 


art  are  not  the  natural  result  of  a  true  sense  of  ornamental 
abstraction,  of  architectural  fitness,  and  of  the  nature  of  mate- 
rials. They  do  not  manifest  a  fine  appreciation  of  the  beauty 
of  the  object  conventionalized.  They  are  factitious  conventions 
which  often  do  violence  at  once  to  the  forms  of  nature,  and  to 
the  true  principles  of  design.  The  ear  of  barley,  and  the  flower 
stalks,  in  Plate  IX,  a  characteristic  work  of  the  Lombardi  in 
the  church  of  Santa  Maria  dei  Miracole  in  Venice,  illustrate 
this.    The  rigid  parallel  straight  sides  and  the  square  end  of  the 


Fig.  97.  —  Renaissance  Arabesque. 


barley  ear,  and  the  flaccid  sinuousness  of  the  flower  stalk,  are 
expressive  of  no  architectural  or  material  conditions  to  which 
the  artist  had  to  conform.  They  express  nothing  but  the  de- 
signer's insensitiveness  to  the  character  and  beauty  of  the  natural 
forms.  Compare  the  ear  of  barley  (Fig.  98)  from  an  ancient 
Greek  coin  in  the  British  Museum.^  Though  severely  conven- 
tionalized, this  representation  finely  expresses  the  true  character 
of  the  real  object.  Such  details  as  the  rectangular  barley  ear 
and  nerveless  flower  stalk  in  Plate  IX  would  seem  to  indicate 
an  incapacity  on  the  part  of  the  designer  to  appreciate  those 
elements  of  beauty  in  plant  life  which  may  be  made  effective  in 
ornamental  carving,  were  they  not  associated  with  other  details 
that  manifest  a  fuller  sense  of  vital  character.     The  foliation  of 

1  Coin  of  Metapontum. 


170 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


Fig.  98.  —  Greek  coin,  magnified. 


the  scrolls  in  the  same  relief  (Plate  IX)  has  a  character  which 
makes  us  wonder  how  a  designer  who  could  so  finely  render 
the  nervous  life  of  leafage  could  associate  with  this  leafage  the 

lifeless  details  just  noticed, 
and  the  further  monstros- 
ities of  the  axial  composi- 
tion including  the  char- 
acterless grotesque  animals 
out  of  which  the  scroll 
leafage  issues.  The  sym- 
metrical Arabesque  scheme 
of  the  whole,  and  the 
nonsensical  details  of  the 
central  part,  are  from 
the  Roman  source,^  while 
the  leafage,  though  also 
cast  in  the  Roman  form, 
owes  much  of  its  best 
quality  to  the  inspiration  of  Gothic  art.  The  qualities  that  give 
their  subtle  charm  to  such  conventionalized  forms  elude  com- 
plete analysis  and  definition,  but  they  are  based  on  the  pro- 
portions, curvature,  and  relations  of  lines  and  surfaces  that 
belong  to  the  organic  forms  of  nature. 

Such  subtle  beauty  of  leafage  is  exceptional  in  the  orna- 
mental design  of  the  Renaissance.  The  carver  of  the  fifteenth 
century  generally  misses  the  vigour  of  line,  the  finer  surface 
flexures,  and  the  expression  of  organic  structure  shown  in  the 
supremely  fine  details  of  the  reliefs  by  the  Lombardi.  The 
convolutions  of  Renaissance  design  are  apt  to  be  more  formal 
and  the  leading  lines  less  springy.  In  some  cases  the  finer 
qualities  of  curvature  are  wholly  wanting,  as  in  the  scrolls  that 
border  the  bronze  door-valves  of  St.  Peter's  in  Rome  by  the 
Florentine  sculptor  Filarete  (Fig.  99).  In  these  scrolls  the 
heavy  and  lifeless  character  of  the  poorest  Roman  models  is 
reproduced.  The  finish  of  these  carvings,  in  the  better  exam- 
ples, is  usually  elaborate,  and  in  such  work  as  that  of  the  Lom- 


1  Vitruvius,  bk.  7,  chap.  5,  refers  with  disapproval  to  the  tasteless  and  mean- 
ingless monstrosities  embodied  in  the  ornamental  art  of  his  time,  and  the  remains  of 
Roman  reliefs  offer  many  examples  of  such  design. 


ARCHITECTURAL  CARVING 


171 


bardi  in  Venice  it  is  exquisite.  But  in  many  cases  it  is  mere 
surface  smoothing  without  expressive  character,  as  in  the  leaf- 
age of  Benedetto  da  Maiano  in  the  pulpit  of  Santa  Croce  of 
Florence,  where 
the  expression  of 
the  beautiful  leaf 
anatomy  is  almost 
wholly  polished 
out. 

It  is  a  funda- 
mental weakness 
of  this  style  of 
ornamentation  that 
it  is  so  largely 
made  up  of  arti- 
ficial convolutions 
and  formal  sym- 
metries. Reduced 
to  its  linear  ele- 
ments, it  mainly 
consists  either  of 
an  axial  line  with 
scrolls  and  weak 
curves  set  symmet- 
rically on  either 
side  of  it,  or  of  a 
formal  meander 
with  alternating 
scrolls.  The  weari- 
some repetition  of 
these  two  schemes 
of  composition  is  a 
characteristic  of  the 
art  of  the  Renais- 


Fk;.  99. 


Arabesque  by  Filarete,  Rome. 

sance.  Many  changes  are  wrung  on  these  primary  motives,  but 
no  possible  variation  of  them  can  reheve  their  dulness.  That  they 
are  derived  from  an  ancient  source  does  not  justify  their  use. 
They  are  not,  however,  drawn  from  the  best  ancient  source.  In 
Greek  art  elements  of  a  kindred  nature  had  been  treated  in  a 
finer  way,  with  exquisite  moderation   of  curvature  and  vitality 


172 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


of  line.  But  the  ornamental  designers  of  the  Renaissance  drew 
their  inspiration  from  the  Graeco-Roman  travesties  of  Greek 
ornamentation,  such  as  the  tiresome  arabesques  that  were 
painted  on  the  walls  of  Pompeian  houses. 

The  arrangements,  as  well  as  the  treatment,  of  the  details 
drawn  from  plant  life  that  are  associated  with  this  style  of 
design  are  often  most  artificial  and  inorganic,  as  in  the  pulpit 
of  Santa  Croce  before  mentioned,  where  on  the  side  of  a  con- 
sole (Fig.  100)  fruit  and  leafage  issue  from  a  nondescript  recep- 
tacle of  ungraceful  shape,  having  a  clumsy  fluted  stalk  bound 
with  a  fluttering  ribbon  ending  in  a  tassel.     Such  unnaturally 


Fig.  icx).  —  Console  of  pulpit  in  Santa  Croce. 

composed  details  are  unknown  in  the  pure  Gothic  art  which  the 
men  of  the  Renaissance  thought  so  barbaric.  The  introduction 
of  objects  like  the  singular  cornucopia  and  the  ribbon  of  this 
design  is  common  in  Renaissance  ornamentation.  Without 
affirming  that  artificial  objects  may  never  enter  into  an  orna- 
mental composition,  I  think  it  may  be  said  that  such  objects, 
if  used  as  conspicuous  features,  ought  to  have  some  beauty  of 
form,^  and  certainly  every  group  of  objects,  of  whatever  kind, 
should  be  composed  so  as  to  produce  an  effect  of  organic  unity. 


1  The  theory  respecting  the  use  of  artificial  elements  in  architectural  ornamenta- 
tion developed  by  Ruskin  in  his  well-known  chapter  entitled,  "The  Lamp  of  Beauty," 
in  the  Seven  Lamps  of  Architecture,  is,  I  believe,  entirely" right  in  principle,  though 
the  author  is  arbitrary  in  some  of  his  conclusions  and  overemphatic  in  some  of  his 
statements. 


ARCHITECTURAL   CARVING 


173 


Each  detail  ought  to  have  a  place  and  a  posture  which  should 
make  it  a  part  of  some  system  of  related  ornamental  lines. 
This  is,  of  course,  elementary,  and  the  principle  is  usually  car- 
ried out  in  the  ornamentation  of  the  Renaissance,  though  in  a 
highly  artificial  way.  But  in  the  design  on  the  triangular  panel 
of  this  console  there  is  no  fine  system  of  related  lines.  The 
fruit  and  leafage  have  a  disjointed  arrangement,  and  the  wrig- 
gled ribbon  has  no  beauty  of  line  or  surface. 

Instances  of  such  disordered  composition  are  conspicuous  in 
the  borders  of  the  famous  Ghiberti  gates  of  the  Florentine 
Baptistery,  where  the  bosses  of 
leafage  set  at  regular  intervals 
are  composed  in  the  same  in- 
organic way  (Fig.  10 1),  and 
the  bunches  are  bound  with 
spiral  fluted  fillets.  It  is  notice- 
able that  the  details  are  here 
elaborated  with  a  minute  nat- 
uralistic completeness  that  is 
incompatible  with  architectural 
effectiveness.  The  possibilities 
of  the  bronze  material  in  which 
the  design  is  wrought  are  de- 
veloped to  the  utmost  in  the 
rendering  of  leaf  veinings,  ser- 
rations, and  surface  textures. 
This  tendency  to  combine 
excessive  naturalism  with  ex- 
tremely artificial  composition  is 
a  curious  characteristic  of  both 
Roman  and  Renaissance  art. 

We  find  in  the  ornamental  carving  of  the  Renaissance  not 
only  a  formal,  and  often  a  disjointed,  scheme  of  composition, 
with  artificial  objects  of  no  beauty  or  meaning  introduced  among 
elements  derived  from  natural  forms,  but  numerous  instances 
occur  where  the  design  is  made  up  entirely  of  such  objects,  as 
in  a  pilaster  in  the  National  Museum  of  Florence  (Fig.  102). 
Such  value  as  this  design  has  lies  wholly  in  its  childish  symmetry 
of  arrangement  of  the  ugly  elements  about  an  axis.  It  contains 
nothing  else  on  which  the  eye  can  rest  with  pleasure.     I  think 


Fig. 


loi.  —  Leafage  from  the  Ghiberti 
gates. 


174 


ARCHITECTURE  OE  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


it  may  be  taken  as  a  true  principle  that  architectural  ornament 
cannot  be  good  unless  it  be  an  expression  of  the  kind  of  beauty 
that  we  find  in  organic  nature.     I  do  not  say  that  the  elements 

of  such  ornament  must  be 
directly,  or  consciously,  drawn 
from  nature ;  but  every  quality 
of  line  and  surface  that,  in  a 
healthy  state  of  mind,  we  feel  to 
be  beautiful  is  exemplified  in 
organic  nature,  so  that  however 
abstract  or  conventional  a  piece 
of  good  carving  may  be,  its 
forms  will  have  a  correspond- 
ence with  those  of  natural 
objects. 

The  finest  forms  that  occur 
in  the  carvings  of   the  Renais- 
sance   are    those    of    fohation 
such  as  we  have  already  noticed 
(p.   170).      But   even  these  are 
rarely  of   real  excellence.      An 
appreciation  of  the  vital  beauty 
of   leafage    has   in  general  not 
been  manifested  by  the  Italians, 
whether  ancient  or  modern.  The 
leafage  of  Roman  art  is  as  in- 
ferior to  Greek  leafage  as  that 
of    the    Renaissance    is   to  the 
foliation  of  the  French  Gothic 
Ji  -- -  \ti n^^^S^S6^k^^\     carvers.     Take,  for  mstance,  the 
■i  l^^Ww^^i^^^'iiP'^  ^^W-     ^^^^P    acanthus    leaves    of    the 
i^i^^l^^^i^^^'^'  "■■'  i^  ^P     capital  from  P2pidaurus(/i,  Fig. 
%.'^M^^^^^  Jr^^y^  ■- B.  .M     103)    in    the    National  Museum 

of  Athens,  with  their  strong  ner- 
vous life  notwithstanding  their 
severely  conventional  treatment ;  or  the  leaf  B  in  the  same 
figure,  from  another  Greek  capital  in  the  same  museum,  with 
its  spiky  cusps  and  its  exquisite  systems  of  radiating  lines  — 
at  once  true  to  nature  and  effective  as  ornament ;  and  com- 
pare with   these  any  examples   of    Roman,  or   Graeco-Roman, 


S^ 


Fig.  102.  —  Pilaster  in  the  National 
Museum,  Florence. 


ARCHITECTURAL    CARVING 


175 


leafage,  as  A  and  B  (Fig.  104).  Observe  in  A,  from  a  com- 
posite capital  in  the  Naples  Museum,  the  excessive  convolu- 
tion of  the  leaf  ends,  the  obtuse  rounded  cusps,  the  lack  of 
radial   relationship   in   the   lines   of    depression,    and    the   un- 


FiG.  103.  —  Greek  leafage. 

modelled  flatness  of  the  surfaces  between  the  furrows.  And 
notice  in  B,  from  a  Corinthian  capital  supposed  to  have  belonged 
to  the  so-called  Temple  of  Jupiter  Stator,  the  immoderate  and 
artificial  undulations  of  line  and  surface. 


Fig.  104.  —  Roman  leafage. 


Turning  now  to  the  Renaissance  leafage  of  capitals,  we  may 
take,  first,  any  one  of  the  portico  of  the  Pazzi  chapel  by  Brunel- 
leschi.  The  obtuseness  shown  here  (Fig.  105)  to  the  fine  quali- 
ties of  natural  forms  that  may  be  made  effective  as  architectural 
ornament  is  really  amazing.     The  treatment  is  of  the  Roman 


176 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP.' 


Fig.  105.  —  Leafage  of 
Brunelleschi. 


kind  with  emphasis  on  the  artificial  conventions  of  Roman  art. 
The  rigid  lines  and  rectangular  sections  of  the  furrows,  each 
ending  abruptly  in  a  straight  line  across  the  bottom,  and  the 

unmodelled  flatness  of  the  intervening 
surfaces  indicate  a  surprising  lack  of 
appreciation  of  those  elements  of  beauty 
which  distinguish  really  fine  ornamental 
carving.  Such  leafage  is,  indeed,  ex- 
ceptionally poor,  yet  instances  of  a  kin- 
dred sort  are  not  seldom  met  with,  as 
in  the  capitals  of  the  doorway  of  the 
sacristy  of  Santa  Croce  in  Florence  by 
Michelozzi. 

The  more  characteristic  Renaissance 
leafage  is,  however,  sometimes  beauti- 
ful, as  in  the  capitals  of  the  municipal 
palace  of  Brescia  (Fig.  106),  Never- 
theless, a  curious,  and  singularly  arti- 
ficial, convention  is  noticeable  here  in  the  fillet-like  form,  and 
abrupt  angular  termination  of  the  upper  end,  of  the  ridges 
which  mark  the  subdivisions  of  the  leaf  surface.  This  peculiar 
detail  is  of  almost  constant  occurrence  in  the  acanthus  folia- 
tion of  the  Renaissance,  and  is 
in  marked  contrast  with  the  r' 
finely  rounded  and  more  natural  ^^5 
treatment  of  the  corresponding 
parts  of  the  Greek  leaf  forms  as 
in  Figure  103.  This  unnatural 
detail  sometimes  t?kes  another 
form,  as  in  a  capital  by  Giuliano 
da  San  GaDo  in  the  Palazzo 
Gondi,  where  its  edges  (Fig. 
107)  are  less  angular,  its  surface 
grooved  lengthwise,  and  the 
upper  end  is  rounded.  But  what- 
ever beauty  this  ItaHan    leafage 

may  have,  the  design  is  rarely  more  than  a  recast  of  Roman 
models,  with  little  manifestation  of  that  fresh  inspiration  from 
nature  that  gives  such  charm  to  Gothic  foliation. 

The  grotesque,  which  enters  largely  into  these  ornamental 


Fig.  106.  —  Leafage  of  Brescia. 


ARCHITECTURAL    CARVING 


177 


compositions,  is  uniformly  weak  and  characterless.  This  has 
been  already  noticed  (p.  170)  in  the  work  of  the  Lombardi. 
It  is  equally  marked  in  all  other  neo-classic  representations  of 
imaginary  creatures.  The  south-  __-  ^-     .  _    ■ 

ern    genius    appears    never    to       -^M^^^^^^g^^^i, 
have  been  capable  of  conceiving 


Fig.  107.  —  Leafage  of  San  Gallo.  Fig.  io8.  —  Relief  of  the  Scala  d'  Oro. 


the  grotesque  in  an  imaginative  way.  That  power  appears 
to  have  belonged  exclusively  to  the  northern  races.  The 
monster  of  the  Renaissance,  like  his  Roman  ancestor,  has  no 
organic  life,  no  suggestion  of 
reality,  and  therefore  no  im- 
pressiveness  comparable  to 
that  of  the  grotesque  creature 
of  the  Gothic  carver.  And 
not  only  is  the  grotesque  of 
the  Renaissance  unimagina- 
tive and  insipid,  but  its  forced 
monstrosities  not  seldom  have 
a  repulsive  vulgarity,  as  well 
as  a  structureless  incohe- 
rence. Take,  for  instance,  the  silly  creatures  in  the  relief  of  the 
Scala  d'  Oro  in  the  Ducal  Palace  of  Venice  by  Sansovino 
(Fig.  108).  These  nondescript  monsters,  without  anatomy,  and 
without  point  or  meaning  of  any  kind,  are  merely  disgusting 

N 


Fig.  109. 


178  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE         chap,  x 

when  we  attend  to  anything  more  than  the  ornamental  lines 
in  the  abstract,  and  even  these  lines  are  without  any  fine 
qualities.  The  masks  ending  in  leafage  (Fig.  109),  from  a 
pilaster  in  the  church  of  the  Miracole  in  Venice,  are  fantas- 
tical, but  neither  witty  nor  effectively  grotesque ;  and  the  Putti 
treated  in  the  same  way,  so  frequently  introduced,  are  equally 
pointless,  and  without  particular  merit  as  design. 


CHAPTER   XI 

ARCHITECTURE    OF    THE    EARLY    RENAISSANCE    IN    FRANCE 

On  the  north  of  the  Alps  the  Renaissance  had  not  the  same 
meaning  that  it  had  in  Italy,  and  in  France,  where  its  influence 
was  first  felt,  the  art  naturally  assumed  a  different  character. 
The  term  "  Renaissance  "  is  not,  in  fact,  properly  applicable  here, 
for  the  French  people  had  not  had  a  classic  past,  and  the 
adoption  of  architectural  forms  derived  from  classic  antiquity 
was  not  at  all  natural  for  them.  Through  the  developments  of 
a  noble  history  they  had  acquired  and  perfected  a  peculiar 
genius  which  had  found  expression  in  forms  of  art  that  were 
radically  different  from  those  of  ancient  times ;  and  in  now 
departing  from  the  principles  of  this  art  they  did  violence  to 
their  own  native  traditions  and  ideals. 

It  has  been  often  affirmed  that  French  architecture  was  but 
superficially  changed  by  the  Renaissance  influence,  and  that  its 
essential  character  survived  beneath  the  Italian  dress.^  This  is 
not  wholly  true.  The  Italian  influence  did  effect  a  fundamental 
change  in  this  architecture  by  giving  it,  as  we  shall  presently 
see,  a  factitious,  in  place  of  a  natural,  character.  This  point 
has  been  overlooked  by  those  writers  who  have  maintained  that 
the  French  artistic  genius  suffered  no  loss  of  integrity  while 
yielding  to  the  Renaissance  movement. 

But  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  native  art  had  lost  its 
best  character  long  before  the    Italian    influence  supervened. 

^  The  most  authoritative  French  writers  are  misleading  in  affirming  that  no 
radical  departure  from  their  best  building  traditions  was  made  by  the  French  archi- 
tects of  the  Renaissance.  Thus  VioUet  le  Due  (Diet.,  vol.  3,  s.  v.  Chateau,  p.  174) 
says  of  these  architects,  "Toujours  fideles  a  leurs  anciens  principes,  ils  ne  sacrifierent 
pas  la  raison  et  le  bon  sens."  But  while  affirming  this,  these  same  writers  sometimes 
makf  admissions  which  so  materially  qualify  the  affirmation  as  to  deprive  it  of  its 
truth  ;  thus  the  same  author,  remarking  on  the  changes  that  were  making  in  the 
character  of  the  chateau,  adds  (p.  185),  "Nous  accordons  que  la  tentative  etait 
absurde  ;  mais  la  renaissance  fran5aise  est,  k  son  debut,  dans  les  lettres,  les  sciences 
ou  les  arts,  pleine  de  ces  hesitations." 

179 


i8o  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  'RENAISSANCE  chap. 

The  finest  Gothic  impulse  was  spent  before  the  close  of  the 
thirteenth  century,  and  the  feeble  spirit  and  florid  extrava- 
gance of  the  Flamboyant  style  which  now  prevailed  betrayed  a 
weakened  condition  of  the  national  artistic  mind  which  made  it 
an  easy  prey  to  the  foreign  innovations. 

Until  the  sixteenth  century  the  Gothic  style  survived  in  its 
decadent  forms.  Yet  in  some  quarters  before  this  time  an 
interest  in  the  arts  of  antiquity  was  gaining  foothold,  and  a  few 
Italian  artists  had  come  into  France  and  wrought  some  small 
architectural  works  in  the  neo-classic  manner.  But  the  way 
appears  to  have  been  opened  for  a  more  general  movement  in 
the  new  direction  when  the  French  upper  classes  began  to  con- 
struct fine  houses  adapted  to  the  requirements  of  luxurious  life. 
This  movement  was  favoured  by  the  changed  conditions  of  the 
times.  Concomitant  with  the  cessation  of  feudal  turmoil  and 
the  need  for  fortified  castles  was  a  great  increase  of  material 
wealth,  far  exceeding  that  which  France  had  enjoyed  at  any 
former  time  in  its  history.  Life  and  property  were  now  secure, 
population  grew,  the  towns  enlarged  their  borders,  and  the 
resources  of  the  king  and  the  nobles  were  correspondingly 
enlarged.^  These  conditions  had  found  expression  in  architec- 
ture during  the  fifteenth  century  in  such  palatial  houses  as  that 
of  Jacques  Coeur  at  Bourges,  and  the  Hotel  Cluny  in  Paris. 
These  houses,  though  retaining  the  irregular  character  of 
mediaeval  French  castles,  have  no  defences,  and  are  abundantly 
lighted  on  all  sides  by  large  window  openings.  They  are  the 
forerunners  of  the  Renaissance  chateaux. 

To  understand  the  early  French  Renaissance  chateau  it  is 
necessary  to  recall  the  character  of  the  feudal  castle  of  the 
Middle  Ages  out  of  which  it  was  evolved.  The  plan  of  the 
feudal  castle  was  generally  irregular  and  its  outline  pictu- 
resquely broken.  But  its  irregularity  and  picturesqueness  were 
not  the  result  of  any  purpose  on  the  part  of  its  builders  to  pro- 
duce a  picturesque  effect.  It  was  a  consequence  of  the  natural 
conformation  of  the  rugged  site  to  which  the  building  had  to 
shape  itself,  of  the  need  for  defensive  towers,  and  of  the  con- 
ditions of  climate  caUing  for  high-pitched  roofs,  more  or  less 
broken  by  dormers  and  chimney-stacks. 

The  earlier  palatial  residences  of  the  open  country  were  in 

^  Martin,  Hist,  de  France,  vol.  7,  pp.  378-382. 


EARLY  RENAISSANCE  IN  FRANCE 


i8i 


many  cases  the  older  castles  remodelled  or  enlarged,  and 
opened,  by  great  windows  cut  through  their  massive  walls,  to 
the  light  and  air.^  And  although  there  was  no  longer  need  for 
such  defences  as  would  withstand  the  siege  of  a  feudal  army,  it 
was  still  for  some  time  necessary  to  provide  for  security  against 
roving  bands  of  marauders  which  continued  to  move  about,  and 
thus  the  surrounding  fosse  and  the  drawbridge  were  retained 
for  a  considerable  time  after  the  loopholes  and  embattled  towers 
of  the  Middle  Ages  had  become  unnecessary. 

In  cases  where  the  chateau  was  a  wholly  new  building,  it 
was  generally  placed  on  even  ground,  and  the  plan  became 
symmetrical.  Yet  still  the  outline  remained  broken  with  the 
steep  gables,  chimneys,  and  dormers  that  are  proper  to  a  north- 
ern climate ;  and  even  the  towers,  turrets,  and  other  features  of 
feudal  architecture  were  largely  retained.  The  French  chateau, 
as  has  been  often  remarked,  was  never  transformed  into  any 
likeness  to  the  Italian  villa;  but  it  was,  nevertheless,  so  radi- 
cally changed  as  to  lose 
that  admirable  logic  of  de- 
sign which  distinguishes 
the  French  architecture 
of  the  Middle  Ages.  The 
composition  of  the  Re- 
naissance chateau  is  facti- 
tious in  the  sense  of  being 
artificially  made  up  ;  it  is 
not,  like  the  mediaeval 
castle,  an  outgrowth  and 
expression  of  natural  con- 
ditions and  actual  needs. 
Thus  while  it  is  still 
peculiarly  French  in  char- 
acter, it  is  not  an  expres- 
sion of  the  French  genius 
in  its  integrity.  The 
French  genius  in  its  in- 
tegrity has  not  been  manifested  in  architecture  since  the  Mid- 
dle Ages. 

The  earliest  palatial  houses  of  the  Renaissance  in  France 

1  Cf.  Viollet  le  Due,  s.  v.  Chateau,  p.  1 90. 


SPK^fWr???*>f?;'^«'K?^^ 


3)rr  «JY|F  ^   'W'«L 


Ftg.  1 10.  —  Cornice  of  Blois. 


1 82 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


are  ornamented  with  debased  Gothic  details  almost  exclusively. 
The  neo-classic  elements  are  introduced  sparingly,  and  are 
hardly  noticeable  in  the  general  effect.  An  illustration  of  this 
is  afforded  in  those  parts  of  the  chateau  of  Blois  which  were 
built  under  Louis  XII.  Here  the  egg  and  dart  scheme  is 
worked  on  the  lower  members  of  the  cornice,  while  elsewhere 
the  mediaeval   details  are  retained.     This  cornice  (Fig.  no)  is 


Fig.  III.  —  Azay  le  Rideau. 


a  curious  medley,  though  of  no  exceptional  kind.  Against  a 
flat  lower  member  is  a  corbel-table  (a  Romanesque  feature) 
treated  in  a  Flamboyant  way,  the  small  arches  being  splayed 
and  having  the  three-centred  form.  The  crowning  mould- 
ings have  approximately  true  Gothic  profiling,  while  a  Flam- 
boyant parapet  of  elaborate  design  surmounts  the  whole. 

Of  the  distinctive  early  French  Renaissance  architecture, 
which  took  form  during  the  reign  of  Francis  I,  a  fine  example 
is  the  chateau  of  Azay  le  Rideau  (Fig.  in).  This  building 
was  an  entirely  new  structure,  not  a  mediaeval  one  remodelled. 
It  is  of  moderate  dimensions,  and,  although  it  has  considerable 


XI 


EARLY  RENAISSANCE  IN  FRANCE 


183 


Fig.  112.  —  Portal  of  Azay  le  Rideau. 


i84  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

beauty;  it  well  illustrates  the  hybrid  and  factitious  character  of 
early  French  Renaissance  design.  There  was  no  need  of  de- 
fences, yet  round  towers  are  set  on  the  angles  simulating  those 
of  feudal  times,  and  each  one  of  these  is  crowned  with  a  low 
overhanging  story  supported  on  corbels,  and  having  a  super- 
ficial resemblance  to  the  mediaeval  machicolated  gallery.  This 
overhanging  attic  is  carried  along  each  side  of  the  building,  and 
its  numerous  small  square  windows  are  so  spaced  as  to  give 
the  intervening  wall  solids  somewhat  the  appearance  of  battle- 
ments, while  steep  gables,  crowned  with  spiky  pinnacles,  and 
high  dormers  and  chimneys  make  up  a  total  composition  of 
great  picturesqueness.  The  larger  features  are  all  of  mediaeval 
form,  but  the  windows  are  flanked  with  classic  pilasters  and 
crowned  with  entablatures.  The  most  elaborate,  and  least 
admirable,  feature  of  this  building  is  an  ornamental  bay 
(Fig.  112),  not  seen  in  the  general  view  here  shown  (Fig.  iii), 
which  embraces  the  main  portal.  This  bay  is  worthy  of  analysis 
because  it  is  a  highly  characteristic  example  of  French  Renais- 
sance design  in  which  distorted  neo-classic  details  are  worked 
into  a  pseudo-Gothic  scheme.  The  composition  is  plainly  de- 
rived from  the  neighbouring  castle  of  Chateaudun,  which  was 
built  at  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  ornamented 
in  the  Flamboyant  Gothic  style.  In  Chateaudun  (Fig.  113)  a 
staircase  tower  rises  over  the  main  portal  of  the  south  facade 
in  four  stories.  The  front  of  this  tower,  which  is  flush  with  the 
wall  of  the  facade,  is  treated  as  an  enriched  bay,  the  upper  two 
stories  of  it  reaching  above  the  main  cornice,  and  being  flanked 
by  round  turrets  overhanging  the  wall,  which  is  corbelled  out  to 
support  them.  The  portal  is  double,  and  each  upper  story  of 
the  bay  has  a  pair  of  large  openings.  All  of  these  openings 
have  the  Flamboyant  depressed  arches,  and  the  whole  bay  is 
flanked  by  buttresses,  wjiile  a  smaller  buttress  is  set  against  a 
middle  pier  that  rises  through  the  composition.  All  of  these 
parts  have  the  characteristic  Flamboyant  forms  and  ornamental 
details.  The  openings  are  splayed,  and  their  profilings  have  the 
sharp  Flamboyant  arrises.  The  buttresses  have  the  multiplicity 
of  angular  members  set  obliquely,  with  the  simulated  interpene- 
trations,  and  the  niches  and  canopies,  of  the  latest  Gothic  style. 
Returning  now  to  the  portal  of  Azay  le  Rideau  (Fig.  112), 
we  find  this  scheme  substantially  reproduced,  but  with  greatly 


XI 


EARLY  RENAISSANCE  IN  FRANCE 


iSs 


Fig.  113. — Clialcaudun. 

altered  details.  In  place  of  the  buttresses  we  have  a  remark- 
able combination  of  columns,  pilasters,  and  other  neo-classic 
ornaments  put  together  so  as  to  produce  a  pseudo-Flamboyant 


1 86  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

Gothic  effect.  The  portals  and  windows  are  flanked  with 
pilasters  and  crowned  with  entablatures,  and  the  whole  is 
bounded  right  and  left  by  superimposed  columns  broken  by 
highly  ornamented  niches,  and  banded  by  the  string  courses  and 
entablatures.  On  the  first  floor  over  the  portal  the  window 
pilasters  are  made  to  appear  as  hidden  behind  tall  ornamental 
niches,  composed  of  many  neo-classic  and  nondescript  elements, 
arranged  in  the  manner  of  the  details  on  Flamboyant  buttresses. 
Only  small  portions  of  the  base  mouldings  of  the  pilasters  appear 
beneath  this  filigree  overlay.  In  the  story  next  above,  the  cen- 
tral pilaster  only  is  hidden  in  this  way,  but  here  a  part  of  the 
capital,  instead  of  the  base,  comes  into  view.  The  manner  in 
which  the  pseudo-Gothic  features  are  adjusted  to  the  neo- 
classic  elements  of  the  composition  is  curious  in  other  ways. 
The  pilasters  of  the  several  superimposed  orders  are,  of  course, 
of  equal  length  in  each  story,  and  their  entablatures  make 
strongly  marked  horizontal  lines.  But  the  nondescript  orna- 
ments laid  over  these  orders  are  carried  up  to  unequal  heights, 
all  of  them  crossing  the  middle  entablature,  and  the  finial  of 
the  central  one  reaching  above  the  architrave  of  the  top  en- 
tablature, while  the  lateral  pilasters  of  this  upper  order  are 
wholly  exposed  to  view,  except  that  the  finials  of  the  canopies 
over  the  niches  below  cover  parts  of  their  bases.  The  mixture  of 
neo-classic  and  pseudo-Gothic  forms  is  carried  out  in  the  details 
of  these  superimposed  ornaments.  Under  the  base  of  each 
niche  are  two  diminutive  pilasters,  set  obliquely  so  as  to  present 
an  arris  in  front,  like  the  angular  members  in  Flamboyant  but- 
tresses, as  in  Chateaudun,  and  between  these  is  a  small  shaft 
supporting  a  corbel  which  forms  the  base  of  the  niche.  The 
niche  is  flanked  by  slender  pilasters  set  obliquely  in  conformity 
with  those  below,  but  these  pilasters  are  almost  entirely  hidden 
from  view  by  very  salient  nondescript  ornaments  worked  on  the 
face  of  each.  The  mouldings  of  the  grouped  bases,  which  are 
of  different  magnitudes,  interpenetrate  in  Flamboyant  fashion, 
and  the  canopies  over  the  niches  are  made  up  of  miniature 
entablatures  on  curved  plans  ornamented  with  filigree,  and  each 
of  them  is  surmounted  by  a  group  of  minute  niches  with 
statuettes,  and  crowned  by  a  finial.  The  windows  have  the 
depressed  arches  of  the  Flamboyant  style,  with  panelled  dadoes 
beneath,  as   in  Chateaudun ;    but   their  profilings  are  pseudo- 


EARLY  RENAISSANCE  IN  FRANCE 


187 


classic,  and  they  have  keystones  at  their  crowns.  The  total 
scheme  is  more  mediaeval  than  classic,  notwithstanding  the  free 
use  of  neo-classic  orders.  To  produce  a  continuity  of  upright 
lines,  and  thus  emphasize  the  Gothic  effect,  the  entablatures 
are  broken  into  ressauts  over 
the  pilasters,  and  are  carried 
around  the  lateral  columns, 
as  before  remarked.  The 
double  portal  is  the  only  part 
of  the  composition  that  is 
quite  free  from  mediaeval  ele- 
ments. The  order  and  the 
arches  are  here  combined  in 
the  ancient  Roman  manner, 
as  they  are,  indeed,  in  the 
upper  stories ;  but  here  the 
arches  have  the  Roman  semi- 
circular form,  and  the  order 
is  not  overlaid  with  other 
ornaments.  Classic  propor- 
tions are  not  at  all  observed. 
The  pilasters  are  short,  and 
are  raised  on  high  pedestals, 
which  are  necessary  to  the 
composition  in  order  to  give 
the  effect  of  adequate  founda- 
tion for  the  superstructure. 
The  design  as  a  whole  has 
no  reason  on  structural 
grounds,  nor  has  it  any  logic 
of  simulated  structure.  Such 
merit  as  it  has  is  of  a  purely 
abstract  ornamental  kind  en- 
tirely extraneous  to  the  build- 
ing. Apart,  however,  from 
its  factitious  general  char- 
acter, and  its  incongruous  details,  the  chateau  of  Azay  le 
Rideau  has  a  thoroughly  French  character,  and  is  one  of  the 
finest  monuments  of  the  early  Renaissance  in  the  country. 
Among    other    chateaux    contemporaneous    with    Azay    le 


Fig.  114.  —Part  of  the  Portal  of 
Chenonceaux. 


i88  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

Rideau,  and  of  similar  character,  are  Chenonceaux  and  La 
Rochefoucauld.  Of  Chenonceaux  the  portal  (Fig.  114)  is 
worthy  of  notice  as  an  instance  of  a  different  manifestation 
of  the  survival  of  Flamboyant  ideas  in  the  treatment  of  neo- 
classic  details.  In  this  portal  we  have  again  the  three-centred 
form  of  arch,  with  a  keystone  and  continuous  imposts.^  The 
jambs  and  archivolt  are  in  three  planes,  or  orders,  of  shallow 
projection,  with  simple  mouldings  of  semi-Flamboyant  effect. 
No  entablature  surmounts  this  portal,  but  a  corbelled  cornice 
supporting  a  heavy  balcony  passes  over  the  arch.  This  balcony 
has  a  curved  ressaut  at  each  end  carried  on  a  massive  corbel  in 
graduated  rings  of  overhanging  masonry,  with  a  compound 
support  beneath  consisting  of  a  stout  pilaster  and  two  small 
shafts.  The  Flamboyant  idea  running  through  this  nondescript 
scheme  is  shown  in  the  depressed  form  of  the  arch,  and  by  the 
simulated  interpenetrations  at  the  imposts  of  the  pilasters. 

In  La  Rochefoucauld  we  have  an  instance  of  a  mediaeval 
fortified  castle  transformed  into  a  palatial  residence.  The  most 
noticeable  features  here  are  the  superimposed  arcades  of  the 
court.  In  these  arcades  we  have  orders  of  pilasters  used  in  the 
Roman  way  to  frame  in  the  arches,  but  these  arches  have  the 
Flamboyant  three-centred  form.  In  the  top  story  the  number 
of  arches  is  doubled,  and  the  entablature  over  them  is  crowned 
with  an  ornamental  parapet  and  finials.  The  vertical  lines  of 
the  superimposed  pilasters,  made  continuous  by  ressauts  in  the 
entablatures  and  carried  up  through  the  parapet  by  the  finials, 
give  a  semi-Gothic  expression  to  the  ancient  Roman  scheme. 

In  those  parts  of  the  vast  chateaux  of  Blois  and  Chambord 
that  were  built  in  the  time  of  Francis  I  a  richer  phase  of  this 
early  French  Renaissance  architecture  is  found.  The  eastern 
wing  of  Blois,  which  had  been  begun  by  Louis  XII,  illustrates 
this.  On  the  side  facing  the  court  the  walls  are  panelled,  not 
as  they  sometimes  were  in  the  earlier  buildings,  as  at  La  Roche- 
foucauld, by  interpenetrating  mouldings  of  Flamboyant  profiling, 
but  by  three  superimposed  orders  of  pilasters,  in  which  a  con- 
tinuity of  upright  lines  is  given  by  shallow  ressauts  in  the  en- 
tablatures (Fig.  115).     The  pilasters  are  here  irregularly  spaced 

1  I  use  Willis's  term,  "  continuous  impost,"  for  an  impost  in  which  the  jambs 
pass  into  the  arch  without  the  interposition  of  a  capital,  and  without  change  of 
profiling. 


XI  EARLY  RENAISSANCE  IN  FRANCE  189 

in  conformity  with  the  window  openings  of  the  work  that  had 
been  begun,  and  considerably  advanced,  under  the  preceding 
reign;  and  have  the  novel  addition  of  ornamented  bead  mouldings 


Fig.  115.  —  Part  of  the  court  facade  of  Blois. 

set  on  the  edges  of  the  pilasters,  and  along  the  under  edges  of 
the  entablatures,  while  in  each  of  the  panels  thus  framed  the 
salamander  and  crown  are  carved  in  rehef.     In  the  deep  and 


I90  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

elaborate  cornice,  dentils  and  modillions  and  the  &%,%  and  dart 
are  worked  in  with  Gothic  gargoyles  and  a  corbel-table;  while  a 
rich  parapet  crowns  the  whole,  and  dormers  of  picturesque  form, 
with  pseudo-classic  orders  surmounted  by  gables  and  pinnacles, 
rise  against  the  vast  high-pitched  roofs  which  are  further  broken 
by  ornamented  chimney-stacks.  A  survival  of  the  later  Gothic 
habit  of  design  is  further  shown  in  the  continuity  of  upright 
lines  obtained  by  the  ressauts  already  remarked.  But  the 
most  remarkable  feature  of  this  facade  is  the  great  polygonal 
staircase  tower  that  rises  through  it.  Four  vast  piers  like 
buttresses,  reaching  from  the  ground  to  the  main  cornice 
which  is  carried  out  so  as  to  crown  them,  are  treated  like 
colossal  pilasters  with  rich  Corinthianesque  capitals,  and  are 
banded  above  the  middle  with  mouldings  of  classic  profiling. 
Yet  on  the  face  of  each  of  these  members  is  a  corbelled  niche, 
with  a  rich  canopy  and  statue  in  late  Gothic  style.  These  piers 
are  connected  by  three  stages  of  ramps  with  panelled  parapets 
elaborately  ornamented  with  small  pilasters,  carvings  in  relief, 
and  gargoyles  issuing  from  their  base  mouldings.  The  whole 
composition  is  crowned  with  a  dormer  having  a  square  opening 
on  each  side,  grouped  pilasters  on  the  angles,  an  entablature 
with  compound  ressauts  over  the  pilasters,  and  with  gargoyles 
reaching  from  the  cornice,  and  a  balustrade  over  all. 

The  reader  should  consider  well  the  meaning  of  all  this,  and 
observe  how  the  persistence  of  the  native  French  habits  of 
design,  without  the  logic  of  the  former  time,  was  still  giving  a 
largely  mediaeval  aspect  to  works  in  which  details  from  the 
Italian  Renaissance,  modified  and  combined  in  strangely  new 
ways,  were  being  more  and  more  freely  introduced. 

On  the  garden  side  this  wing  of  Blois  has  a  different  design, 
and  shows  a  survival  of  the  Flamboyant  depressed  arch  in  the 
window  openings  necessitated  by  the  form  of  the  earlier  facade, 
which  is  incased  in  that  of  Francis  I.^  The  windows  of  this 
earlier  facade  were  spaced  and  proportioned  so  as  to  make  wide 
and  narrow  voids  and  solids  alternate  in  a  very  irregular  man- 
ner. In  the  work  of  the  sixteenth  century,  which  overlays  this, 
superimposed    pilasters  are  set  in  pairs   on    the   wider   solids, 

^  Du  Cerceau's  plate  (Z«  Plus  Excellents  Bastiments  de  France,  vol.  2,  plate  4) 
is  incorrect,  like  most  of  his  other  plates,  in  giving  the  semicircular  form  to  the 
openings  of  this  fa9ade. 


XI  EARLY  RENAISSANCE  IN  FRANCE  191 

and  single  ones  adorn  the  narrow  piers.  The  pilasters  of  the 
lower  order  rest  on  tall  pedestals  supported  on  spurs  rising  out 
of  the  batter  wall  of  the  basement,  while  the  upper  order  is 
set  on  plinths  resting  on  the  entablature  of  the  order  beneath. 
This  upper  order  has  a  plain  corbel-table  in  place  of  an  entabla- 
ture, with  a  simple  cornice,  and  gargoyles  over  the  pilasters. 
Over  this  is  the  novel  feature  of  an  open  gallery  covered  by  an 
extension  of  the  main  roof  which  is  held  up  by  columns  of  no 
distinct  order,  with  a  balustrade  in  each  interval.  Similar  gal- 
leries were  afterward  in  some  instances  produced  by  extending 
the  roofs  over  originally  uncovered  terraces  below  the  eaves, 
supporting  the  extension  on  wooden  posts  —  as  at  La  Rochefou- 
cauld. 

The  walls  of  Chambord,  the  next  vast  chateau  of  the  early 
French  Renaissance,  are  adorned  with  pilasters  as  at  Blois, 
though  the  design  below  the  cornice  is  much  simpler.  Above 
the  cornice,  however,  it  is  the  richest  of  all  the  great  French 
chateaux,  and  with  its  steep  roofs  and  manifold  dormers,  chim- 
neys, and  central  lantern,  it  presents  an  aspect  which  for  multi- 
plicity of  soaring  features  resembles  a  late  Gothic  building.  It 
is  not  worth  while  to  give  an  extended  analysis  of  its  redundant 
details  which,  with  its  vast  chimneys  adorned  with  free-stancjing 
orders,  niches,  panelled  surfaces,  and  pinnacles ;  its  dormers 
with  overlaid  orders  of  pilasters,  pediments,  scrolls,  and  endless 
filigree  ornaments ;  and  its  great  lantern  with  inverted  consoles 
on  entablatures  forming  flying-buttresses  (where  there  is  nothing 
to  be  buttressed),  make  up  a  bewildering  complex  without 
structural  meaning  or  artistic  merit.  Viollet  le  Due  has  well 
remarked  that  "Chambord  est  au  chateau  feodal  des  XI IP  et 
XIV^  si^cles  ce  que  I'abbaye  de  Theleme  est  aux  abbayes  du 
XIP  si^cle  :  c'est  une  parodie." 

The  same  general  character,  though  in  less  florid  develop- 
ment, marks  those  parts  of  Fontainebleau  which  are  contempo- 
raneous with  Blois  and  Chambord.  This  is  true  also  of  Ecouen, 
where  the  architectural  scheme  is  comparatively  simple.  In- 
stead of  superimposed  orders  the  walls  of  Ecouen  are  adorned 
with  continuous  pilasters  banded  by  the  mouldings  of  entabla- 
tures that  crown  each  of  the  stories.  These  details  are  in  very 
shallow  relief,  the  wall  spaces  enclosed  by  them  are  not  pan- 
elled as  at  Blois  and  Chambord,  and  the  windows  have  no  fram- 


192  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

ing  members.  Even  the  dormers  have  a  marked  sobriety  of 
design,  though  they  are  framed  with  small  orders,  and  crowned 
with  fantastic  pediments  made  up  of  classic  elements  and  fili- 
gree ornaments. 

The  architect  Bullant,  who  appears  to  have  had  a  large  part 
in  the  design  of  Ecouen,  was  among  the  first  French  architects 
of  the  Renaissance  to  travel  in  Italy.  In  Rome,  as  he  tells  us 
in  his  book,i  he  had  measured  some  of  the  ancient  monuments, 
and  in  the  great  portico  of  the  court  he  reproduced  the  order  of 
a  Roman  temple.^  This  portico  embraces  both  stories  of  the 
building,  and  is,  I  believe,  the  earliest  example  in  France  of  the 
reproduction  of  an  ancient  order  without  any  admixture  of 
mediaeval  details,  or  Italian  corruptions.  In  the  main  body  of 
the  building  it  was  natural  that  the  architect  should  modify  and 
adjust  his  neo-classic  details  in  the  prevailing  manner  of  his 
time ;  but  this  colossal  portico  gave  him  an  opportunity  to  carry 
out  fully  the  classic  Roman  ideas  which  he  appears  to  have 
imbibed  during  his  Roman  sojourn.  It  was  impossible,  however, 
to  make  any  organic  connection  between  this  ancient  scheme 
and  the  building  to  which  it  is  attached,  and  it  stands  against 
the  fagade  as  an  utterly  foreign  interpolation. 

An  exceptional  building  of  the  early  French  Renaissance  is 
the  chateau  of  St.  Germain  en  Laye.  The  top  story  of  this 
building  is  vaulted,  and  to  meet  the  vault  thrusts  a  series  of 
deep  buttresses  is  ranged  along  each  facade.  These  buttresses 
are  connected  by  arches  at  the  level  of  the  floor  of  the  principal 
story  ^  and  beneath  the  main  cornice,  and  entablatures,  which 
crown  the  basement  and  the  principal  floor,  break  around  them. 
They  are  adorned  with  pilaster-strips  of  Romanesque  propor- 
tions, connected  by  small  blind  arches,  capped  by  ressauts  of 
the  main  cornice,  and  pierced  with  water-ducts  ending  in  gar- 
goyles. The  arched  windows  are  in  pairs  (one  pair  in  each 
story  between  each  pair  of  buttresses),  and  are  framed  with 
pilaster-strips  and  entablatures  surmounted  with  pediments. 
The  balconies  formed  by  the  ledges  over  the  lower  arches  are 

^  Reigle  Generalle  de  Architecture,  etc.,  Paris,  1568. 

2  Said  by  Palustre,  E Architecture  de  la  /Renaissance,  p.  176,  to  have  been 
"  servilement  imite  du  temple  de  Jupiter  Stator." 

8  These  lower  arches  are  concealed  from  view  on  the  external  facades  by  a  base- 
ment wall. 


XI  EARLY  RENAISSANCE  IN  FRANCE  193 

enclosed  with  balustrades,  and  balustrades  connect  the  buttresses 
over  the  main  cornice.  The  roof  is  very  low  and  invisible,  thus 
there  are  no  dormers,  but  large  chimneys  ornamented  with  blind 
arcading  break  the  sky  line. 

Such  is  the  early  Renaissance  architecture  of  France.  Not- 
withstanding its  factitiousness,  and  its  ornamental  incongruities, 
it  still  has,  as  I  have  said,  a  distinctly  French  expression, 
though  it  has  not  the  reasonable  character  of  the  native  art  of 
the  Middle  Ages  in  its  integrity.  But  the  departure  from  their 
own  ideals  and  traditions  was  destined  to  be  carried  further, 
and  at  length  to  reach  results  which  should  still  more  pro- 
foundly contradict  the  true  native  spirit.  This  further  trans- 
formation was  wrought  during  the  second  half  of  the  sixteenth 
century  under  the  influence  of  several  noted  architects  who 
stand  in  relation  to  the  French  Renaissance  very  much  as 
Vignola,  Palladio,  and  their  followers  stand  in  relation  to  that 
of  Italy.  The  art  of  these  men  will  be  considered  in  the  next 
chapter. 


CHAPTER   XII 

LESCOT   AND    DE    l'ORME 

Among  the  architects  of  the  later  French  Renaissance 
Pierre  Lescot  and  PhiHbert  De  I'Orme  were  preeminent.  The 
change  which  they  effected  gave  the  French  architecture  a 
more  marked  neo-classic  dress,  yet  still  without  wholly  eliminat- 
ing its  native  character.  This  change  was  of  course  analogous 
to  that  which  had  been  wrought  in  Italy  by  the  later  designers 
of  that  country,  but  the  resulting  forms  in  France  were  different 
from  those  of  the  Italian  art,  and  were  to  the  last  peculiarly 
French,  though,  as  before  remarked  (p.  1 79),  not  expressive  of 
the  French  genius  in  its  integrity.  This  was  entirely  natural. 
The  architecture  of  a  people  inevitably  retains  much  of  its 
original  character  while  yielding  to  foreign  influences.  It  had 
been  so  with  the  ItaUan  art  of  the  Middle  Ages  when  it  was 
subjected  to  the  Gothic  influence,  and  it  could  not  be  otherwise 
with  the  French  art  of  the  sixteenth  century  when  the  later 
Renaissance  wave  swept  over  it. 

Lescot  and  De  I'Orme  came  strongly  under  the  influence 
of  Vignola  and  Palladio,  their  Italian  contemporaries,  and  they 
fully  accepted  the  Italian  belief  in  the  superiority  of  the  neo- 
classic  principles  of  design  to  those  which  had  given  rise  to 
what  they  considered  the  architectural  barbarisms  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  Lescot,  says  Berty,^  "  was  one  of  the  first  French  archi- 
tects to  employ  the  ancient  style  in  its  purity,"  and  De  I'Orme, 
according  to  Milizia,^  "  exerted  all  his  industry  to  strip  architec- 
ture of  her  Gothic  dress  and  clothe  her  in  that  of  ancient 
Greece." 

Lescot  is  said  to  have  designed  the  Fountain  of  the  Nymphs, 
now  known  as  the  Fountain  of  the  Innocents,^  in  Paris,  in  col- 
laboration with  Goujon,  the   sculptor.     In  this  work   there  is 

1  Adolphe  Berty,  Les  Grands  Architectes  Frattfais  de  la  Renaissance,  Paris, 
i860,  p.  70.  2  Milizia,  Memorie,  vol.  i,  p.  404.  ^  Berty,  op.  cit.,  p.  71. 

194 


CHAP.  XII  LESCOT  AND  DE  VORME  195 

nothing  whatever  of  mediaeval  character.  In  its  present  con- 
dition it  is,  indeed,  very  different  from  what  it  was  originally. 
It  first  (1550)  stood  on  the  corner  of  two  streets  with  a  fagade 


Fig.  1x6.  —  Du  Cerceau's  engraving  of  the  Fountain  of  the  Nymphs. 

of  two  bays  on  one  street  and  a  return  of  one  bay  on  the  other. 
In  1788  it  was  taken  down  and  reerected  in  the  square  of  the 
Innocents  on  a  square  plan,  a  fourth  facade  being  then  added. 
Figure  116,  from  an  engraving  by  Du  Cerceau.^  illustrates  the 

^  Les  Plus  Excellents  Bastiments  de  France,  plate  69. 


196  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

original  design,  each  bay  of  which  is  nothing  more  than  a  repro- 
duction of  the  scheme  of  a  Roman  triumphal  arch,  with  a 
short  pediment  over  the  attic.  The  whole  structure  is  raised 
on  a  high  basement  of  plain  character  with  lions'  heads  for 
water-spouts.  Such  pure  imitation  of  the  antique  does  the 
architect  little  credit  as  a  designer,  and  it  is  hard  to  understand 
how  such  works  could  have  been  regarded  as  monuments  of 
a  regenerating  art.  The  sculptures  by  Goujon  which  adorn  this 
structure  have,  in  my  judgment,  no  monumental  qualities,  nor 
any  notable  merits  of  design.  Their  movements  are  awkward, 
and  their  lines  ill  composed.  The  influence  of  the  decadent 
Italian  art  is  marked  in  them,  without  any  new  qualities  that 
should  entitle  them  to  distinction. 

Little  is  known  of  the  early  training  of  Lescot  beyond  what 
is  told  in  a  poem  by  Ronsard,^  from  which  we  learn  that  in  his 
youth  he  had  occupied  himself  with  painting  and  geometry,  and 
that  at  the  age  of  twenty  he  began  the  study  of  architecture. 
He  does  not  appear  to  have  visited  Italy,  and  his  knowledge  of 
ancient  art  must,  therefore,  have  been  acquired  at  second  hand ; 
very  likely  in  great  part  through  Serlio's  book  which  had  been 
published  in  1537.  A  woodcut  (Fig.  117)  on  page  127  of  this 
book,^  giving  the  design  of  an  ancient  Roman  arch  in  Verona, 
might  have  served  as  a  model  for  the  Fountain  of  the  Nymphs. 
He  must  also  have  come  in  contact  with  Serlio  himself,  who  in 
1 541  had  been  called  into  the  service  of  the  French  king. 

The  capital  work  of  Lescot  was  the  early  part  of  the  new 
Louvre,  begun  about  1546  on  the  site  of  the  old  castle  of 
Phihppe  Auguste  which  Francis  I  had  demolished  in  order  to 
rebuild  in  the  new  style.  The  new  scheme  was  apparently 
intended  to  cover  almost  precisely  the  same  area  that  had  been 
occupied  by  the  mediaeval  structure,  and  the  old  foundations 
were  to  be  utilized  in  the  new  building.  Thus  in  conformity 
with  the  older  castle  Lescot's  design  embraced  a  square  court ; 
but  only  a  part  of  this  project  was  actually  carried  out,  namely, 
the  wings  on  the  south  and  west  sides.  And  of  these  the  south 
wing  afterward  suffered  a  damaging  alteration  by  the  architect 
Lemercier  who  enlarged  the  court  to  about  four  times  the  area 

^  The  lines  of  this  poem  which  relate  to  Lescot  are  quoted  by  M.  Berty  in  op. 
cit.,  pp.  66-68. 

"^  Regale  Generale  di  Architettura  di  Sebastiano  Serlio. 


XII 


LESCOT  AND  DE  DORME 


197 


that  Lescot  had  intended.  Thus  the  only  part  of  Lescot's 
work  which  has  survived  substantially  intact  is  that  part  of  the 
existing  west  side  which  extends  from  the  southwest  angle  to 
the  great  western  pavilion.      This   portion   is   figured   by    Du 


Fig.  117.  —  Roman  arch,  Serlio. 


Cerceau,^  and  save  for  some  alterations  in  the  timber  roof  the 
existing  fabric  agrees  with  his  print. 

In  this  design  (Fig.  1 18)  there  is  no  survival  of  the  character 
of  a  mediaeval  stronghold,  though  the  rectangular  pavilions, 
which  break  the  long  facades,  and  the  high  pitched  roofs  are 

1  op.  cit.,  plate  2. 


198 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


feeble  echoes  of  the  mediaeval  French  traditional  forms.  It  is 
worthy  of  notice  that  Lescot's  projecting  bays  have  no  meaning 
apart  from    their  aesthetic  effect  in  the   external    architectural 


Fig.  118.  —  Part  of  Du  Cerceau's  print  of  Lescot's  Louvre. 


scheme.  In  the  feudal  castle  the  towers  had  of  necessity  to 
stand  out  beyond  the  curtain  walls  in  order  from  their  loop- 
holes and  battlements  to  defend  them.  But  the  salient  pavilions 
of  the  Louvre  have  no  function ;  they  do  not  even  materially 
enlarge  the  interior,  but  are  purely  ornamental  features.     The 


xii  LESCOT  AND   DE  EORME  199 

scheme  includes  two  stories  and  an  attic,  each  of  which  is 
adorned  with  a  classic  order.  In  the  basement  and  in  the 
principal  story  the  orders  consist  of  fluted  Corinthian  pilasters 
on  pedestals,  while  in  the  attic  short  pilasters,  with  their  sur- 
faces panelled  in  the  Lombard  Renaissance  manner,  are  used. 
The  principal  orders  only  have  complete  entablatures,  the  order 
of  the  attic  having  only  a  cornice  with  a  frieze  which  takes  in 
the  capitals,  and  this  cornice  is  surmounted  by  a  parapet  with 
filigree  ornamentation.  In  the  intercolumniations  of  the  base- 
ment order  arches  are  sprung  beneath  the  entablature  in  the 
Roman  fashion,  each  arch  embracing  a  narrow  window  with 
a  segmental  head  concentric  with  the  arch,  while  the  window 
openings  of  the  upper  stories  are  rectangular,  those  of  the  prin- 
cipal floor  having  alternately  round  and  angular  pediments  on 
consoles. 

In  the  pavilions  we  have  in  each  story  a  variation  of  the 
scheme  of  the  Fountain  of  the  Nymphs.  The  imitation  of 
Serlio's  cut  (Fig.  117  above)  is  closer,  Corinthian  columns  being 
used  instead  of  pilasters  as  in  Serlio's  design.  But  in  the  base- 
ment the  architect  has  made  marked  changes  in  the  central  bay, 
omitting  the  arch,  and  cutting  out  a  portion  of  the  entablature. 
This  last  device,  of  which,  as  we  have  seen,  the  later  Renais- 
sance architecture  of  Italy  affords  many  instances,  is  not  only 
a  violation  of  the  principles  of  classic  design  which  these  archi- 
tects were  professing  to  restore,  but  it  is  a  barbarism,  because  it 
breaks  the  continuity  of  those  lines  which  in  such  a  composition 
should  have  the  expression  of  binding  the  parts  together.  In 
the  story  above  the  entablature  is  not  completely  broken ;  the 
architrave  and  frieze  only  are  cut  in  order  to  insert  a  tablet. 
In  the  attic,  however,  the  cornice  is  cut  out  completely,  and 
a  segmental  arch  is  sprung  over  the  opening  to  form  a  pedi- 
ment as  a  crowning  feature  of  the  pavilion.  The  traditional 
logic  of  French  design  is  thus  completely  ignored  by  Lescot, 
and  he  abandons  himself  to  capricious  methods  of  composition 
as  completely  as  the  Itahans  had  done.  It  is  surprising  not 
only  to  find  the  French  people  thus  following  the  Italians  in 
their  irrational  misuse  of  structural  forms  in  ornamentation,  but 
also  to  find  them,  after  having  produced  in  the  Middle  Ages  the 
most  living  and  beautiful  forms  of  foliate  sculpture  that  the 
world  has  ever  seen,  resorting  to  the  heavy  and  formal  festoons 


200  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

of  decadent  Roman  art,  as  Lescot  has  done  in  these  friezes  of 
the  Louvre. 

Another  noticeable  characteristic  of  this  phase  of  Renais- 
sance design  in  France  is  its  excessive  profusion  of  ornament. 
The  wall  surfaces  are  embossed  with  reliefs,  or  set  with  niches, 
disks,  or  tablets  until  no  broad  plain  surfaces  remain.  Such 
extravagance  of  ornament  is  characteristic  of  later  Roman,  and 
debased  Gothic,  but  it  is  foreign  to  the  finest  classic,  and  the 
pure  Gothic,  art. 

Of  the  architectural  work  of  De  I'Orme  little  is  now  extant, 
and  the  most  of  that  which  has  survived  has  suffered  such  alter- 
ations that  we  can  form  from  the  monuments  themselves  but  an 
imperfect  idea  of  their  original  aspect.  We  have,  however,  in 
the  fragments  that  remain,  in  Du  Cerceau's  prints,  and  in  the 
illustrations  to  his  own  writings,  enough  to  show  that  he  was 
a  man  with  little  artistic  genius,  though  he  had  an  ardent 
passion  for  architecture  as  he  understood  it.^  He  was  among 
those  architects  of  his  time  who  went  to  Rome  to  study  the 
antique,  and  he  tells  us  in  his  book^  that  he  dug  about  their 
foundations,  and  made  drawings  and  measurements.  His  most 
important  work  was  the  palace  of  the  Tuileries,  begun  in  1 564. 
Of  this  gigantic  scheme  only  a  small  part,  the  central  part  on 
the  garden  side,  was  completed  by  De  I'Orme,  and  this  was 
much  altered  by  successive  architects  before  the  building  was 

1  Viollet  le  Due,  in  his  Entretiens  sur  V Architecture,  p.  362,  says,  "  Philibert 
De  rOrme  etait  peut-etre  I'artiste  dont  le  gofit  etait  le  plus  sflr,  le  sentiment  le  plus 
vrai,  les  principes  les  plus  severes."  This  estimate  appears  to  me  singularly  short- 
sighted, but  it  is  in  keeping  with  the  artistic  limitations  of  its  gifted  author,  whose 
great  abilities  did  not,  I  think,  include  the  finest  powers  of  artistic  judgment.  Viollet 
le  Due's  own  architectural  projects,  as  illustrated  in  the  Entretiens,  are  enough  to 
show  this.  A  truer  estimate  is  given  by  M.  Berty,  in  his  Life  of  De  P  Orme,  as  fol- 
lows: "Ayant  absolument  rompu  avec  la  tradition  Gothique,  toujours  plein  du 
souvenir  des  monuments  remains  qu'il  avait  etudies  en  Italic,  et  qui  constituaient 
pour  lui  la  vraie  architecture,  De  I'Orme,  visant  sans  cesse  a  la  majeste,  n'atteignit 
souvent  que  la  lourdeur.  D'un  autre  cote,  trop  preoecupe  de  la  recherche  d'une 
beaule  rationnelle  qu'il  demandait  plutot  au  calcul  qu'au  sentiment,  precede  perni- 
cieux  qui  egare  a  coup  sflr,  il  ne  pent  eviter  les  bizarreries  et  meme  les  gaucheries 
dans  ses  conceptions.  .  .  .  C'est  sur  le  terrain  de  la  science  qu'il  a  vraiment  domine 
tous  ses  rivaux,  en  acquerant  des  droits  incontestables  a  la  reconnaissance  de  la 
posterite."  (^Les  Grands  Architectes  Fran^ais,  etc.,  p.  36.)  It  was  the  scientific 
ability  of  De  I'Orme  that  Viollet  le  Due  could  best  appreciate,  his  own  genius  being 
more  scientific  than  artistic. 

^  Le  Premier  Tome  de  P Architecture,  etc.,  Paris,  1567. 


XII 


LESCOT  AND  DE  EORME 


201 


destroyed  in  1871.  The  plan,  as  given  by  Du  Cerceau  (Fig. 
119),  is  symmetrical,  but  it  is  broken  by  projecting  bays  and 
angle   pavilions  more  pronounced   than  those  of   the  Louvre. 


Fig.  119.  —  Plan  of  the  Tuileries,  from  Du  Cerceau. 


These  features,  survivals  of  the  mediaeval  plan,  distinguish 
the  French  Renaissance  architecture  from  that  of  Italy  to  the 
last. 

The  external  facade  (Fig.  120)  has  a  single  story  with  an  attic 
of  broken  outline,  and  in  it  the  architect  made  use  of  a  peculiar 


202 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


form  of  Ionic  column  of  which  he  speaks  ^  as  follows :  "  I  make 
here  a  short  digression  to  speak  of  the  Ionic  columns  which  I 
have  employed  in  the  above-mentioned  palace  of  her  Majesty 
the  Queen  Mother.^  .  .  .  The  said  columns  are  sixty-four  in 
number  on  the  side  facing  the  garden,  and  each  one  is  two  feet 
in  diameter  at  the  base.  They  are  not  all  of  one  piece,  since  I 
could  not  find  so  large  a  number  of  such  height  as  was  neces- 
sary. ...     I  have  fashioned  them  as  you  see  (Fig.  121),  and  with 


Fig.  120. — Tuileries,  from  Du  Cerceau. 


suitable  ornaments  to  hide  the  joints  ;  which  is  an  invention  that 
I  have  never  yet  seen  in  any  edifice  either  ancient  or  modern, 
and  still  less  in  our  books  of  architecture.  I  remember  to  have 
made  nearly  the  same  in  the  time  of  his  late  Majesty  Henry  II, 
in  his  chateau  of  Villers  Cotterets,  in  the  doorway  of  a  chapel 
which  is  in  the  park,  and  it  was  very  graceful,  as  you  may 
judge  from  the  figure  which  I  give."  Further  on  he  proposes 
that  this  shall  be  called  the  French  order,  saying :  "  If  it  was 
allowable  for  the  architects  of  antiquity,  in  different  nations  and 
countries,  to  invent  new  columns,  as  the  Romans  invented  the 

1  op.  cit.,  p.  156. 

2  The  Tuileries  was  designed  by  De  I'Orine  for  Catherine  de  Medicis. 


xn 


LESCOT  AND  DE  EORME 


203 


Tuscan  and  the  Composite,  the  Athenians  the  Athenian,  and, 
long  before  the  said  Romans,  those  of  Doris  the  Doric,  of 
Ionia  the  Ionic  and  Corinthian,  who  shall  forbid  us  Frenchmen 
from  inventing  some,  and  calling  them  French,  as  those  might 
be  called  which  I  have  invented  and  used  in  ^^  j 

the  porch  of  the  chapel  of  Villers  Cotterets  ?  " 
Of  this  column  De  I'Orme,  in  his  book,  gives 
several  variants,  showing  how  the  salient 
drums,  or  rings,  may  be  variously  ornamented 
or  left  plain,  or  may  be  varied  in  their  pro- 
portions ;  and  he  gives  also  a  design  for  a 
doorway  (Fig.  122)^  in  which  he  employs  a 
Tuscan  order  treated  in  this  way. 

It  is  hard  to  conclude  what  to  think  of  De 
rOrme's  claim  to  this  column  as  his  own  in- 
vention, and  of  his  statement  that  he  had 
never  seen  one  of  its  kind  in  any  building, 
or  in  any  book  of  architecture ;  for  such  a 
column  was  not  a  new  thing,  though  it  may 
not  before  have  been  used  in  France. 
Several  examples  of  practically  the  same 
column  occur  in  Serlio's  book,  which  was 
pubhshed  in  1537  when  ^^  I'Orme  was  but 
twenty-two  years  of  age,^  one  of  which,  in  a 
design  for  a  doorway,  is  here  (Fig.  123) 
reproduced. 

Of  this  doorway  Serlio  says :  "  Although 
Doric  doorways  may  be  designed  in  other 
ways,  yet  most  men  are  pleased  with  novelty, 
and  with  that  which  is  not  too  common,  and 
they  have  satisfaction  especially  from  that 
which,  though  being  mixed,  still  retains  its 
character,  as  in  this  doorway  where,  although 
the  column,  the  frieze,  and  other  members 
are  broken,  and  covered  with  rustic  work, 
nevertheless  the  form  is  seen  well  defined  in 
all  its  proportions."  ^     He  does  not  affirm  that  this  novelty  was 

^  op.  cit.,  facing  p.  240. 

2  Assuming  that  De  I'Orme  was  born  in  the  year  15 15. 

8  Op.  cit.,  bk.  4,  p.  26. 


Fig.  121. —  De  I'Orme's 
column. 


Cf.  Berty,  op.  cii.,  p.  i. 


204 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


his  own  invention,  but  he  seems  to  imply  that  it  was.  However 
this  may  be,  he  was  writing  long  before  De  I'Orme  could  have 
produced  such  a  column  as  his  design  shows.  The  chateau 
of  Villers  Cotterets  built  for  Henry  H,  in  which  De  I'Orme 


Fig.  122.  —  De  I'Orme's  doorway. 


remembered  to  have  made  columns  somewhat  like  those  of  the 
Tuileries,  could  not  have  been  begun  before  1547,  the  year  of 
Henry's  accession,  and  ten  years  after  Serlio's  book  was  pub- 
lished. 


XII 


LESCOT  AND  DE  EORME 


205 


An  ancient  adumbration  of  this  form  of  column  occurs  in 
the  Porta  Maggiore  in  Rome,  where  it  has  the  appearance 
of  an  unfinished  work,  the  drums  being  roughly  shaped  to  be 
finished  after  they  were  set  up,  in  the  customary  ancient  manner. 


Vii^.   123.  —  Doorway,  Serlio. 


Such  an  example  may  well  have  suggested  to  the  architects  of 
the  Renaissance  the  idea  embodied  in  Serlio's  cut.  Sansovino 
made  use  of  this  form  of  column  in  the  facade  of  the  Zecca 
in  Venice,  which  was  commissioned  by  the  Council  of   Ten  in 


2o6  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap 

1535,  and  at  Genoa,  in  the  wall  that  was  built  to  enlarge  the 
circuit  of  the  city,  there  is  a  portal  bearing  the  date  1553, 
in  which  the  scheme  figured  by  Serlio  is  carried  out.  This 
peculiar  column  had  therefore  undoubtedly  been  in  existence, 
both  in  a  book  of  architecture  and  in  actual  monuments,  before 
De  rOrme  was  writing.  It  is,  of  course,  quite  possible  that  he 
may  have  devised  his  scheme  in  ignorance  of  the  Italian  ex- 
amples, but  whether  he  did  or  not  is  for  us  a  matter  of  little 
importance.  It  is,  I  think,  an  architectural  monstrosity,  and 
reflects  little  credit  on  its  designer. 

It  may  be  further  remarked  concerning  De  I'Orme's  claim 
to  this  column  as  his  own  invention,  that  it  expresses  an  idea 
which  was  at  the  bottom  of  most  of  the  architectural  misconcep- 
tions and  mistakes  of  the  Renaissance,  the  idea  that  architec- 
tural excellence  may  result  from  independent  personal  effort  to 
be  original.  I  think  it  may  be  said  that  the  artistic  aberrations 
of  the  Renaissance  arose  largely  from  this  false  notion.  The 
conscious  effort  to  be  original  in  architecture  is  inevitably 
disastrous.  The  personal  contributions  of  individuals  in  archi- 
tectural development  consist  of  little  more  than  small  improve- 
ments on  lines  of  endeavour  common  to  large  bodies  of  men. 
The  aggregate  of  such  improvements  finally  become  conspicu- 
ous, and  mark  fundamental  changes  of  architectural  styles ;  but 
the  part  of  any  individual  in  such  changes  is  hardly  noticeable. 
Noble  architecture  has  always  been,  and  must,  I  think,  always 
be,  mainly  a  social,  communal,  and  national,  not  a  personal 
product.  De  I'Orme  failed  to  consider  that  the  ancient  or- 
ders were  not  inventions  of  individual  designers,  but  the  out- 
come of  a  process  of  evolution  toward  which  the  ingenuity  of 
large  numbers  of  men  through  long  periods  of  time  had  contrib- 
uted. He  thought  that  he  might  himself  invent  a  new  order, 
and  call  it  French.  He  ought  rather  to  have  called  it  by  his 
own  name,  for  it  was  not  French  in  the  sense  of  being  a  prod- 
uct of  the  collective  French  genius.  Had  he  and  his  contem- 
poraries had  more  discernment,  they  might  have  realized  that  a 
true  French  order  was  already  in  existence  in  that  very  Gothic 
art  which  they  vilified,  that  the  shaft  and  its  load  of  the  twelfth- 
century  national  style  was  such  an  order,  a  true  evolution  out  of 
the  ancient  orders  superbly  adapted  to  new  conditions.^ 

^  Cf.  my  Defelofment  and  Character  of  Gothic  Architecture,  p.  304  et  seq. 


XII  LESCOT  AN'D  DE  DORME  207 

As  for  De  TOrme's  facade  for  the  Tuileries,  as  an  architec- 
tural composition,  little  in  the  way  of  praise  can,  I  think,  be 
said.  The  basement  arcade  (Fig.  1 20,  p.  202)  is  but  an  adaptation 
of  the  wearisome  Roman  scheme  of  pier  and  arch  overlaid  with 
an  order  in  which  the  Roman  form  of  column  gives  place  to  the 
peculiar  one  just  described  and  called  his  own  invention.  This 
deformed  column  has  an  Ionic  capital,  and  De  I'Orme  tells  us 
that  he  employed  the  Ionic  order  here  because  it  had  been  as 
yet  little  used,  and  "because  it  is  feminine,  having  been  in- 
vented after  the  proportions  of  women  and  goddesses,"  ^  and  is 
therefore  suitable  for  the  palace  of  a  queen.  In  this  facade  the 
monotony  of  the  long  range  of  arches  with  their  orders  is  partly 
relieved  by  a  ressaut  in  the  entablature  over  every  fourth  bay, 
and  this  ressaut  only  is  supported  by  columns,  pilasters  of  simi- 
lar character  being  used  in  the  intervening  bays.  The  attic 
story  reproduces  with  variations  some  of  the  architectural  va- 
garies of  Vignola  and  his  followers.  Tall,  rectangular  dormers 
alternate  with  oblong  panels  crowned  with  broken  pediments, 
and  flanked  with  coupled  hermae.  In  this  composition  the 
native  French  characteristics  of  design  survive  in  hardly  any- 
thing more  than  the  broken  outline  of  the  attic,  and  the  steep 
roof  behind  it.^  That  such  architecture  is  shaped  on  mathe- 
matical proportions,  and  has  an  orderly  and  rhythmical  distri- 
bution of  parts,  does  not  make  it  good  architecture.  Proportion 
and  rhythm  of  this  mechanical  kind  cannot,  as  I  have  before 
said,  make  a  fine  work  of  art.^ 

What  we  know  of  other  important  works  by  De  I'Orme,  as 
the  chateaux  of  Anet  and  Saint  Maur,  shows  the  same  lack  of  a 
fine  artistic  sense.  The  lay-out  of  these  vast  pleasure-houses 
may  be  well  adapted  to  the  requirements  of  the  courtly  life  of 

1  op.  cit.,  p.  155.  The  fanciful  notion  that  the  Ionic  order  was  designed  after 
female  proportions  is  derived  from  Vitruvius,  bk.  3. 

2  The  roof  is  not  shown  in  Du  Cerceau's  print. 

^  Viollet  le  Due,  I  may  say  again,'  appears  to  me  greatly  to  overestimate 
De  rOrme's  artistic  powers  when  he  says,  "Dans  les  oeuvres  de  Philihert  De  I'Orme 
-on  constate  une  etude  attentive  et  soigneuse  des  proportions,  des  rapports  harmo- 
nieux  qui  semljlent  les  plus  simples,  mais  qui  cependent  sont  le  resultat  fl'une  con- 
raissance  parfaite  de  son  art  et  des  moyens  mis  a  sa  disposition,"  and  when  he  speaks 
of  the  Tuileries  as  follows :  "  Cetait  bien  la  une  architecture  de  palais  graiide  et  noble 
par  ses  masses,  precieuse  par  ses  details."  Enlretiens  sur  V Architecture,  vol.  i, 
P-  363- 


2o8 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


the  time.  De  I'Orme  understood  the  needs  of  this  life,  and  was 
ingenious  in  providing  for  them,  but  such  ingenuity  constitutes 
but  a  small  part  of  an  architect's  equipment,  and  may  exist 


Fig.  124.  —  Doorway  of  De  I'Orme. 


without  any  artistic  aptitude.  It  is  only  in  so  far  as  such  in- 
genuity is  accompanied  by  a  genuine  artistic  sense  that  a  fine 
work  of  art  can  be  produced.  De  I'Orme  undoubtedly  worked 
with  a  steady  regard  for  what  he  considered  artistic  design,  but 


XII  LESCOT  AND  DE  EORME  209 

his  works  show,  I  think,  that  he  was  devoid  of  true  artistic 
genius.  If  further  illustration  of  this  be  desired,  it  may  be 
abundantly  found  in  the  numerous  architectural  projects  pub- 
lished in  his  book,  of  which  the  doorway  (Fig.  124)  is  a  fair 
example. 1  Of  this  composition  the  author  remarks  as  follows  : 
"  I  give  you  here  following  another  form  of  doorway  being 
square  and  straight  in  its  covering,  and  having  pilasters  at  the 
sides,  in  which  one  sees  only  the  plinths  of  their  bases  under 
the  said  pilasters,  which  are  larger  at  the  top  than  at  the  bot- 
tom; which  is  the  contrary  of  the  columns  and  pilasters  made 
according  to  measure  \i.e.  according  to  neo-classic  proportions  ?] 
which  are  narrower  at  the  top  than  at  the  bottom.  But  such 
an  invention  is  produced  according  to  the  suggestion  and 
fancy  that  presents  itself,  like  many  others  ;  which,  provided 
the  proportions  are  well  observed,  are  always  found  to  have  a 
pleasing  effect,  which  is  an  easy  thing  to  do  by  those  who  have 
experience  and  skill  in  architecture.  You  see  how  in  this  design 
which  I  figure,  in  place  of  capitals  mutules  in  the  form  of  con- 
soles carry  the  sofifit  of  a  tympanum  or  frontispiece,  which  is 
cut  out,  as  is  seen,  and  has  its  cornices  above  and  ornaments  on 
acroteria,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  figure  with  all  the  other  orna- 
ments, and  pieces  cut  out  which  make  the  covering  of  the  door- 
way, and  above  a  tablet  with  another  tympanum  and  other 
ornaments.  To  describe  all  in  detail  would  require  too  much 
time,  but  you  can  easily  understand  from  the  drawing,  which  is 
of  a  Doric  doorway  having  three  steps  which  are  well  shown, 
as  in  the  other  doorways,  when  they  are  raised  above  the 
ground."  These  remarks,  like  the  drawing  itself,  show  clearly 
that  design  with  De  I'Orme  was  a  matter  of  purely  capricious 
fancy,  regulated  only  by  a  mechanical  system  of  proportions. 
If  the  rules  of  proportion  be  "well  observed,"  he  thinks  that 
such  a  crazy  composition  as  this,  with  its  foolishly  deformed 
members,  may  have  a  "  pleasing  effect." 

It  is  not  worth  while  to  follow  this  phase  of  the  French 
Renaissance  art  much  further,  but  Du  Cerceau  gives  one  other 
design  that  is  worthy  of  a  moment's  attention  for  its  freakish 
irrationality  and,  I  will  not  hesitate  to  say,  ugliness,  the  project 
for  the  chateau  of  Charleval,  begun  for  Charles  IX,  but  not  far 
advanced  in  construction  at  the  time  of  his  death,  and  never 

1  op.  cit.,  bk.  8,  chap.  9.     The  pages  here  are  not  numbered. 
P 


2IO 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


completed.  The  exterior  f  agade  of  the  basse-court  is  divided  into 
a  long  series  of  bays  (Fig.  125)  by  colossal  rusticated  pilasters  of 
two  orders,  embracing  the  two  stories  into  which  the  elevation, 
above  the  basement,  is  divided.  Each  pilaster  is  crowned  with 
a  section  of  an  architrave  and  frieze,  in  the  form  of  a  ressaut  of 


Fig.  125.  —  Fagade  of  Charleval,  Du  Cerceau. 


two  orders,  which  interpenetrates  the  bed  mouldings  of  the 
continuous  cornice.  Since  the  architrave  and  frieze  are  not 
carried  along  the  intervening  walls,  the  pilasters  have  no  real 
entablature  to  support  even  in  appearance.  Another  unmean- 
ing freak  of  design  in  this  facade  is  the  kind  of  variation  of  the 
details  of  the  several  bays  which  it  exhibits.  The  rectangular 
windows  are  in  one  bay  surmounted  with  round  archivolts,  in 
the  next  with  curved  pediments,  in  another  with  angular  pedi- 


XII  LESCOT  AND  DE  EORME  211 

merits  above  and  curved  ones  below,  in  another  with  curved 
pediments  above  and  round  archivolts  below,  in  still  another 
with  curved  pediments  above  and  a  single  one  embracing 
both  windows  below ;  and  so  on  with  continued  change  with 
no  purpose  but  that  of  mere  change.^  Viollet  le  Due  ^  com- 
mends the  architect  of  this  facade  for  seeking  what  he  calls 
a  grand  disposition  without  abandoning  the  logical  principles  of 
his  predecessors.  But  the  great  French  master  appears  to  me 
to  err  in  his  reasoning  here,  as  frequently  elsewhere  in  his 
discourse  on  the  architecture  of  the  Renaissance.  The  great 
order  of  Doric  pilasters  used  in  this  fac^ade  fills,  he  says,  exactly 
the  function  of  buttresses,  and  he  then  proceeds  to  defend  the 
whole  scheme  by  saying  that,  "  Taking  the  order  as  a  buttress 
it  is  possible,  without  violence  to  reason,  to  cut  it  by  a  floor  " 
{i.e.  to  divide  the  space  between  the  pilasters  into  two  stories). 
But  there  is  no  sense  in  taking  the  order  as  a  buttressing 
system,  for  there  is  nothing  in  the  structure  to  require  buttress- 
ing ;  and  if  there  were,  the  pilasters  of  an  order,  even  though 
doubled,  as  in  this  case,  would  not  form  an  effective  buttress 
system.  It  is  in  nothing  but  the  general  arrangement  of  the 
main  lines  that  such  a  composition  can  be  said  to  bear  any 
resemblance  to  an  organic  mediaeval  system  in  which  buttresses 
have  a  function,  and  are  shaped  so  as  to  express  it. 

The  interior  facade  of  the  same  building  (Fig.  126)  presents 
a  different  scheme.  The  great  order  here  has  fluted  pilasters, 
and  the  division  of  the  building  into  two  stories  is  not  expressed 
on  the  outside.  Viollet  le  Due  remarks  on  this  facade  as 
follows :  "  The  architect  wished  here  not  only  to  accent  the 
great  order  more  clearly,  but  also  to  hide  entirely  the  floor 
of  the  upper  story ;  ^  and  in  adopting  this  scheme,  contrary 
to  the  logical  principles  of  the  architects  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
he  has  carried  it  out  with  remarkable  skill.  The  line  of 
the  floor,  naturally  placed  at  the  level  A,  is  cut  by  arched 
niches,    so    that    the  eye  does  not   suspect    its    existence,  and 

^  It  need  hardly  be  said  that  such  variety  is  very  different  from  that  which 
results  from  an  active  inventive  spirit,  as  where  in  Gothic  art  some  new  constructive 
idea  gives  rise  to  change,  or  where  in  sculptured  ornamentation  a  teeming  fancy  finds 
expression  in  varied  forms. 

2  Entredens,  vol.  i,  p.  374. 

8  I5ut  why  should  an  architect  wish  to  do  any  such  thing?  The  fact  that  he  did 
so  shows  again  the  factitious  and  unreasonable  character  of  this  Renaissance  design. 


212  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

is  forced  to  embrace  the  whole  front  as  if  it  were  one 
stage."  And  he  adds :  "  C'etait  1^  I'oeuvre  d'un  artiste  con- 
somme." ^  Thus  in  one  case  the  architect  is  lauded  for  em- 
ploying the  order  like  a  buttress  system  to  justify  its  embracing 
two  stories,  while  in  the  other  he  is  praised  for  giving  a  decep- 


FlG.  126.  —  Interior  fa9ade  of  Charleval,  Du  Cerceau. 

tive  appearance  of  only  one  story;  so  that  this  part  of  the  design 
may,  as  the  writer  says  in  another  place,  be  in  better  scale  with 
the  order.  But  the  distinguished  author  betrays  embarrassment 
in   dealing    further   with   these   architectural   incongruities   of 

1  Op.  ciL,  p.  375. 


xii  LESCOT  AND  DE  EORME  213 

Renaissance  design,  and  after  remarking  that  the  architects 
of  this  time  have  resorted  to  various  devices  for  overcoming  the 
difficulties  arising  from  the  lack  of  harmony  between  design 
and  construction  ("  entre  la  mode  d'architecture  et  les  conve- 
nances"), which,  he  says,  have  occasioned  them  much  torment, 
he  exclaims  (p.  376) :  "  Voil4  cependant  oii  conduit  I'oubli  des 
principes  vrais."  It  is  indeed  far  into  devious  paths  that  the 
architect  is  led  by  departure  from  the  true  principles  of  design. 

A  few  remarks  on  the  church  architecture  of  the  French 
Renaissance  may  be  added  here.  It  was  natural  that  in  church 
architecture  the  mediaeval  structural  forms  should  largely  sur- 
vive. The  French  people  could  not  adopt  those  semi-classic 
basilican  forms  of  building  that  were  natural  to  Italy.  Thus, 
while  now  professing  to  despise  their  own  noble  Gothic  art,  they 
still  retained  through  the  sixteenth  century  the  later  Gothic 
structural  system  with  no  essential  modification.  This  is  well 
illustrated  in  the  church  of  St.  Eustache  in  Paris,  which  was 
begun  as  late  as  1532.  It  is  a  very  large  cruciform  Gothic 
structure,  with  double  aisles  and  a  range  of  ^ide  chapels,  over- 
laid with  Renaissance  details.  Pilasters  and  entablatures,  vari- 
ously distorted  in  order  to  fit  them  to  the  Gothic  proportions 
and  functions,  take  the  place  of  vaulting  shafts  and  string 
courses  in  the  interior  of  the  nave,  while  on  the  outside  similar 
members  are  used  with  less  distortion  because  of  a  different 
division  of  the  stories  giving  proportions  more  nearly  agreeing 
with  those  of  classic  art.  The  chapels  opening  out  of  the  outer 
aisles  have  only  half  the  height  of  these  aisles,  and  thus  the 
exterior  has  two  stories  where  there  is  but  one  inside.  An 
entablature  crowns  each  of  these  stories,  and  the  upper  one  has 
a  pseudo-Doric  character.  The  buttresses  above  the  chapels 
have  two  superimposed  orders  of  pilasters,  and  are  crowned 
with  urns  on  pedestals.  Thus  was  a  frankly  Gothic  structure 
made  agreeable  to  the  French  taste  of  the  sixteenth  century 
by  a  barbarous  misapplication  of  mixed  and  distorted  classic 
details. 

The  persistence  of  Gothic  structural  forms  is  shown  further 
in  the  church  of  St.  Etienne  du  Mont,  begun  in  15 17.  In  the 
parts  belonging  to  the  original  construction  almost  no  classic 
details  occur.  It  is  Flamboyant  Gothic  of  a  peculiar  type  in 
which  vaulting  of  almost  true  Gothic  form  is  sustained  by  plain 


214  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

cylindrical  columns  of  unusual  height.  The  church  has  no 
triforium,  but  the  columns  are  connected  by  arches  at  the  usual 
triforium  level,  and  these  arches  carry  a  balustraded  passage- 
way. The  archivolts  of  this  arcade  have  classic  profiles  and 
keystones,  and  the  balustrade  is  of  neo-classic  form.  In  the 
west  front,  begun  in  1620,  neo-classic  features  are  adjusted  to 
Gothic  outlines,  and  the  central  portal,  in  the  form  of  a  Roman 
triumphal  arch,  is  furnished  with  columns  modelled  after  those 
of  De  rOrme  which  he  claimed  as  his  own  invention. 

The  church  of  SS.  Gervais  and  Protais  at  Gisors  has  a 
Flamboyant  west  front  in  parts  of  which  Renaissance  features 
have  been  inserted  in  different  degrees  of  compromise  with 
Gothic  forms  and  adjustments.  The  north  tower  below  the 
cornice  has  no  such  features,  but  the  south  tower  has  been  com- 
pletely masked  by  a  late  Renaissance  covering  in  three  stories 
of  pseudo-classic  orders  of  which  the  uppermost  is  incomplete. 
The  main  portal  is  flanked  by  pilasters,  and  has  splayed  jambs 
and  a  splayed  archivolt,  with  an  entablature  at  the  impost. 
A  segmental  arch  over  this  supports  a  ledge  on  which  is  set 
a  tabernacle  of  three  arches,  faced  by  a  Corinthian  order 
having  no  continuous  entablature  but  only  entablature  blocks, 
and  an  attic  over  the  central  arch  crowned  with  a  curved  pedi- 
ment. It  is  unnecessary  to  analyze  this  west  front  further;  it 
presents  one  of  the  most  confused  jumbles  of  incongruous  ele- 
ments anywhere  to  be  met  with. 

A  different  manifestation  of  Renaissance  caprice  is  found 
in  the  florid  exterior  of  the  apse  of  St.  Pierre  of  Caen,  which  is 
made  up  of  details  of  a  sixteenth-century  Lombard  character 
applied  to  a  Flamboyant  structural  scheme:  The  round  arch 
and  the  complete  circle  take  here  the  place  of  the  pointed 
forms,  and  pilasters  against  the  angles  have  short  Flamboyant 
buttresses  set  against  them,  the  faces  of  these  buttresses  being 
treated  like  Lombard  Renaissance  pilasters. 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  designs  to  be  found  in  the 
Renaissance  church  architecture  of  France  is  that  of  the  portal 
of  the  north  transept  of  St.  Maclou  of  Pontoise.  It  belongs  to 
the  early  period,  and  is  much  like  what  we  have  seen  in  the 
portal  of  the  chateau  of  Azay  le  Rideau  (p.  182).  The  opening 
is  round-arched  and  has  a  narrow  splay.  It  is  flanked  by  pilas- 
ters and  crowned  with  an  entablature  surmounted  with  a  fanci- 


XII  LESCOT  AND  DE  EORME  2x5 

ful  pediment  of  broken  outline,  ornamented  with  a  tablet  and 
death's-head,  and  flanked  by  finials  of  nondescript  design.  This 
portal  is  again  flanked  by  colossal  pilasters,  rising  from  pedes- 
tals almost  as  high  as  the  arch  impost,  and  reaching  to  the 
cornice  at  the  level  of  the  aisle  roof.  Against  each  of  these 
pilasters  a  short,  fluted  column,  with  a  capital  of  pseudo- 
composite  form,  rises  from  a  pedestal  engaged  with  the  pilaster 
pedestal.  The  portion  of  the  pilaster  that  rises  above  this 
column  is  treated  like  a  niche,  with  a  base  resting  on  the  capital 
of  the  column,  and  with  an  ornamental  canopy  above  that  rises 
through  the  capital  of  the  pilaster. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  extend  further  these  tiresome  descrip- 
tions. The  foregoing  examples  are  enough  to  show  how  irra- 
tional was  the  use  made  of  neo-classic  details  in  the  church 
architecture  of  the  French  Renaissance,  and  how  they  were 
engrafted  on  a  Gothic  structural  scheme.  It  was  in  this  man- 
ner that  the  French  architects  of  the  time  sought  to  "  reform 
the  Gothic  and  bastard  styles." 


CHAPTER  XIII 

ARCHITECTURE    OF    THE    RENAISSANCE    IN   ENGLAND 

I.    Elizabethan  Art 

When  the  need  for  feudal  strongholds  had  passed,  and  the 
conditions  of  life  in  the  open  country  had  become  peaceful,  a 
type  of  domestic  architecture  arose  in  England  which  assumed 
its  most  characteristic  form  in  the  early  Elizabethan  Age.  The 
best  features  of  this  architecture  were  of  native  growth  out  of 
the  humbler  forms  of  mediaeval  domestic  building,  the  feudal 
castle,  and  the  latest  phase  of  Perpendicular  Gothic.  These 
features  are  mainly  the  rectangular  plan,  with  plain  enclosing 
walls  in  long  blocks  broken  by  projecting  bays,  and  with 
large  mullioned  windows,  high-pitched  roofs,  and  tall  chimney- 
stacks.  The  better  form  of  early  Elizabethan  dwelling  on  a 
large  scale  had  the  plain,  external  character  of  the  traditional 
yeoman's  house.  It  was  planned  with  some  regard  for  conven- 
ience, was  admirably  suited  to  the  climate,  and  was  expressive 
of  that  pleasant  and  dignified  home  life  which  is  peculiar  to 
England.  It  is  picturesque  and  cheerful  in  aspect,  but  has  little 
other  architectural  character  than  such  as  results  from  adapta- 
tion to  needs,  straightforward  logic  of  construction,  and  gener- 
ally good  proportions.  It  embodies  the  essentially  English 
idea,  as  expressed  by  Lord  Bacon,  that,  "  Houses  are  built  to 
live  in,  and  not  to  look  on."  ^  And  while  this  remark  may  seem 
to  ignore  architecture  as  such,  i.e.  the  fine  art  of  beautiful  build- 
ing, it  expresses  a  fundamental  principle  ;  for  to  build  a  house 
to  live  in,  shaped  for  the  needs  of  civilized  human  life,  is 
to  secure  the  primary  condition  of  good  architectural  effect. 
And  no  domestic  architecture  in  Europe  has  had  more  genuine 
charm  for  the  eye  than  that  of  England  of  the  Elizabethan  time 
in  its  integrity,  as  it  may  be  seen,  for  instance,  in  the  greater  parts 

^  Essay  on  Building. 
2l6 


CHAP.  XIII 


THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND 


217 


m 


of  Haddon  Hall;    St.  Johns,  Warwick ;    Hambleton  Old  Hall, 
Rutland ;  North  Mymms,  Hertfordshire,  and  others.^ 

But,  unhappily,  English  life  among  the  upper  classes  in  the 
sixteenth  century  was  not  without  sophistication.  Many  of  the 
great  houses  were  built,  not  for  convenience  and  propriety,  but 
to  gratify  a  spirit  of  ostentation  and  pedantry.  False  notions 
of  symmetry  were  allowed  to  control 
design  at  the  expense  of  fitness,  and 
classic  details,  even  more  grotesquely 
disfigured  than  in  Italy  and  France, 
aind  combined  with  elements  of  name- 
less character,  began  to  overlay  the 
walls,  and  break  the  sky-lines.  The 
formal  regularity  and  awkward  com- 
position of  Hardwick,  and  the  ludicrous 
pseudo-classicism  of  Burghley  House, 
with  its  chimneys  (Fig.  12 7)  in  the  form 
of  Doric  orders,  are  among  the  numer- 
ous instances  of  this.  All  that  of- 
fends the  eye  in  the  English  palatial 
architecture  of  the  sixteenth  and  seven- 
teenth centuries  is  due  to  these  sophis- 
tications, which  largely  subverted  the 
native  good  sense  and  sound  crafts- 
manship. *'  This  was,"  says  Cunning- 
ham, "  a  style  of  architecture  strangely 
compounded,  and  neither  in  the  weak 
wildness  of  its  combinations,  nor  in  the 
flimsy  variety  of  its  materials,  was  it 
made  to  endure.  Plaster,  terra-cotta,  paint,  tiles,  wood,  iron, 
and  brick,  even  when  united  with  all  the  skill  of  the  most  ex- 
quisite art,  cannot  long  resist  the  rapid  wear  and  tear  of  such 
a  humid  climate  as  ours.  Those  unsubstantial  structures,  with 
all  their  dazzling  incrustations,  are  passed  or  passing  from  the 
earth :  nothing  is  lasting  but  hard  massive  stone,  impenetrable 
cement,   and  scientific  combinations."^     It   ought   to  be  said. 


^y "-Fr 

Fig.  127. —  Burghley  House. 


1  These  houses  are  figured  by  Mr.  Gotch  in  his  Architecture  of  the  Renaissance 
in  England,  plates  7,  12,  20,  and  66. 

"^  The  Lives  of  the  Most  Eminent  British  Painters,  Sculptors,  and  Architects^ 
London,  1831,  vol.  4,  p.  85. 


2l8  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

however,  that  whatever  flimsiness  of  material  entered  into  the 
composition  of  these  buildings  was  confined  to  ornamental  details, 
and  chiefly  to  the  interiors.  The  main  body  of  the  Elizabethan 
structure  was  of  solid  and  well-executed  masonry.  Mr.  Bloom- 
field  points  out  that  these  houses  were  built  by  Englishmen  and 
ornamented  by  foreigners.^  And  it  is  certainly  true  that  in 
plan  and  outline  they  have  little  foreign  character.  Most  of 
the  plans  of  the  native  architect,  John  Thorpe,'^  appear,  indeed, 
to  show  a  French  influence,  but  in  the  larger  features  of  the 
elevation  they  are  English.  It  is  thus  in  the  ornamental  details 
chiefly,  which  seem  to  have  been  wrought  in  part  by  foreigners 
and  in  part  by  native  craftsmen  striving  to  conform  to  foreign 
ideas,  that  we  find  the  strangest  aberrations  of  design.  A  few 
examples  will  serve  to  show  the  character  of  this  art. 

The  fa9ade  of  the  north  side  of  the  court  of  Kirby  Hall,  for 
instance,  is  divided  into  bays  by  colossal  pilasters  of  hybrid 
style,  which  have  not  even  a  semblance  of  structural  meaning, 
since  they  carry  only  ressauts  of  an  entablature,  the  total  height 
of  which  is  less  than  the  diameters  of  the  pilasters.  From 
each  of  these  ressauts  rises  a  slender  pedestal,  against  a  low 
attic  wall,  surmounted  by  finials  resting  upon  the  cornice 
(Fig.  128).  The  central  bay,  enclosing  the  entrance  to  the 
court,  is  wider  than  the  others,  and  the  pilasters  here  are 
panelled,  and  have  arabesques  in  relief,  while  the  others  are 
fluted.  The  fagade  is  in  two  stories,  their  division  being 
marked  by  an  entablature ;  the  lower  story  has  an  open  arcade, 
while  the  upper  one  has  a  rectangular  window  in  each  bay 
crowned  with  a  pediment.^ 

The  general  scheme  has  no  English  character,  and  it  so 
nearly  resembles  that  of  the  court  of  Charleval,  in  France, 
(cf.  p.  212)  as  to  suggest  that  its  designer  may  have  been  influ- 
enced by  the  French  composition.     The  effect  of  the  scheme, 

^  A  History  of  Renaissance  Architecture  in  England,  by  Reginald  Bloom- 
field,  M.A.,  London,  1897,  vol.  i,  p.  3. 

2  Almost  nothing  is  known  of  John  Thorpe  beyond  what  may  be  gathered  from 
his  numerous  drawings  preserved  in  the  Soane  Museum.  He  was  working  during 
the  latter  part  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  appears  to  have  been  the  original  designer 
of  some  of  the  larger  houses  of  that  time,  the  plans  of  which  are  contained  in  the 
Soane  collection. 

^  These  windows  are  said  by  Gotch,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  34,  to  have  been  inserted 
by  Inigo  Jones.     An  attic  over  the  central  bay  is  said  to  be  also  by  him. 


THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND 


219 


as  a  whole,  from  the  point  of  view  of  structure,  is  curious 
with  its  great  pilasters  of  unusual  projection,  which  have  the 
function  of  supporting  nothing  but  miniature  pedestals  and 
finials.  In  a  general  view  the  low  attic  wall  has  somewhat  the 
effect  of  an  entablature,  though  it  is  behind,  and  not  over,  the 
pilasters ;  but  considered  as  an  entablature  its  frieze  is  encum- 
bered with  the  pediments  of  the  windows  which  rise  against 
it.     The  windows  are,  however,  an  alteration,  and  the  original 


iV* »"■  >^  ■•    ji^^ 


Fig.  128.  —  North  side  of  court,  Kirby  Hall. 


scheme  may  be  better  judged  of  from  the  opposite,  or  south, 
side  of  the  court.  Here  the  attic  has  distinctly  the  appearance 
of  an  entablature  of  somewhat  suitable  proportions  for  the  order ; 
though,  here  too,  it  is  behind  the  pilasters,  and  does  not  rest 
upon  them.  The  fagade  on  this  side  is  in  one  story,  with  a  tall 
muHioned  and  transomed  window  in  each  bay.  With  a  proper 
entablature  the  scheme  would  not  be  a  bad  one.  The  wall 
being  almost  wholly  eliminated  by  the  great  window  voids,  the 
order  would  have  the  true  function  of  upholding  the  roof  if  a 


220 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


true  entablature  and  the  roof  were  where  they  ought  to  be. 
But  not  only  is  the  attic  wall,  substituted  for  an  entablature,  in 
retreat  of  the  pilasters,  but  the  roof  rises  from  behind  the  attic, 
so  that  this  last  becomes  a  parapet. 

At  the  centre  of  this  facade  of  one  story  is  a  porch  of  two 
stories  with  a  tall  attic  and  a  gable  of  ogee  outline  flanked  by 
finials.  This  porch  has  an  order  of  fluted  Ionic  pilasters  in  the 
ground  story,  an  order  of  Corinthian  columns  above,  and  a  small 
order  of  Corinthian  columns  in  the  attic.     The  pilasters  and 

columns  of  the  first  and  second 
stories  respectively,  are  in  pairs 
on  each  side  of  an  opening,  and 
the  entablature  in  each  of  these 
stories  has  a  ressaut  over  each 
pair.  The  pilasters  of  the  ground 
story  are  raised  on  a  panelled 
podium,  while  the  columns  of 
the  upper  story,  and  of  the  attic, 
are  carried  on  consoles.  The 
attic  has  no  openings,  and  the 
columns  of  the  small  order  here 
are  equally  spaced,  with  nar- 
row intercolumniations,  and  an 
entablature  block  over  each  col- 
umn in  place  of  a  continuous 
entablature.  The  ground  story 
opening  has  a  plain,  round  arch, 
while  that  of  the  upper  story, 
which  is  arched  also,  is  framed 
with  a  stilted  order,  and  crowned  with  a  broken  pediment  of 
curved  outline.  The  scheme  is  a  variation  of  Lescot's  Louvre 
pavilions,  and  thus  appears  to  show  further  that  its  designer  had 
either  studied  in  France,  or  had  borrowed  ideas  from  the  plates 
of  Du  Cerceau's  book. 

The  southwest  angle,  with  its  curved  bays,  in  two  stories  and 
attic,  is  more  English  in  character.  No  neo-classic  elements 
occur  here,  except  the  entablature  bands  which  crown  the  stories. 
The  gables  (Fig.  129)  of  fantastic  outline  with  strap-work  scrolls, 
are,  I  suppose,  of  Flemish,  or  Dutch,  origin ;  but  they  became 
common  features  of  the  more  showy  Elizabethan  architecture. 


Fig.  129.  —  Gable  of  Kirby  Hall. 


xm  THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  221 

Longford  Castle,^  another  design  by  John  Thorpe,  is  triangular 
on  plan  with  a  round  tower  at  each  angle.  Though  the  building 
has  been  more  or  less  altered  in  some  of  its  details,  the  main 
features  tally  with  Thorpe's  elevation,  preserved  in  the  Soane 
collection,  and  reproduced  by  Gotch  (vol.  i,  p.  20).  French 
influence  is  marked  here  in  the  general  disposition  of  the  prin- 
cipal facade,  and  in  some  of  the  more  conspicuous  details.  This 
facade,  in  the  relation  of  the  central  block  to  the  angle  towers, 
bears  a  striking  resemblance  to  the  east  front  of  Chambord. 
The  towers  have  nearly  the  same  form  and  proportions,  but  the 
central  block  is  longer  in  Longford  than  in  Chambord.  The 
architectural  scheme  of  this  block,  though  not  a  reproduction  of 
that  of  Chambord,  has  enough  similarity  to  provoke  comparison. 
Both  are  divided  into  three  stories,  and  both  have  open  arcades 
framed  with  orders.  But  in  Longford  the  arcades  are  confined 
to  the  centre  of  the  block,  and  to  the  first  two  stories,  while  in 
Chambord,  above  the  ground  story,  they  are  differently  disposed, 
and  occur  in  all  three  stories.  The  long  block  of  Longford  has 
two  projecting  pavilions  which  are  connected  by  the  arcades, 
while  the  front  of  Chambord  is  all  in  one  plane ;  but  in  a  gen- 
eral front  view  the  effect  is  not  greatly  different.  In  the 
orders  of  his  pavilions  Thorpe  has  employed  De  I'Orme's 
pilaster  of  the  Tuileries,  and  in  the  attics  which  he  has  set  at 
intervals  over  his  main  cornice,  other  features,  as  the  hermae 
supporting  the  pediments  of  the  Tuileries,  are  reproduced  in 
modified  form.^ 

The  caprice  of  design  shown  in  the  Elizabethan  neo-classic 
ornamentation  assumes  an  astonishing  variety  of  forms,  of 
which  it  may  be  well  to  give  a  few  further  examples.  A  window 
in  the  entrance  front  of  Lower  Walterstone  Hall  has  a  lintel 
in  the  form  of  an  architrave  supported  on  short  sections  of  pilas- 
ters carried  on  brackets,  while  over  this  a  pediment  is  inserted 
in  the  wall  with  an  interval  between  it  and  the  lintel,  the  whole 
forming  the  semblance  of  an  entablature  beneath  the  pedi- 
ment, with  its  frieze  in  the  wall  plane  (Fig.  130).  In  the  porch 
of  Cranborne   Manor-House  an  entablature  over  an  arcade  is 

^  Gotch,  plate  33, 

'^  Du  Cerceau's  book  was  published  in  1576,  and  Longford's  was  begun  in  1580. 
It  is  not  unlikely,  therefore,  that  Thorpe  had  studied  the  designs  of  Chambord  and 
the  Tuileries  in  the  prints  of  this  book. 


222 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


broken  into  ressauts  resting  on 
corbels  in  the  shape  of  lions' 
heads  projecting  from  the  arch 
spandrels  (Fig.  131),  and  over 
this  entablature  is  a  blind  attic 
adorned  with  strap-work.  The 
angles  of  the  facade  in  which 
this  porch  occurs  are  furnished 
with  buttresses  in  three  stages 
with  deep  offsets,  like  those  of 
Gothic  art.  The  outer  face  of 
each  stage  is  ornamented  with 
a  pair  of  pilasters  on  tall  pedes- 
tals, with  an  entablature  in  res- 
sauts, and  over  the  topmost  pair 
are  two  obelisks  as  finials.  The 
pilasters  are 
each  broken 


Fig.  130.  —  Window  of  Walterstone    •       ^.u^    rrCvA. 

die  by  a 
larger  block  of  stone  after  the  manner 
of  De  rOrme's  columns. 

The  gatehouse  at  Tixall  ^  has  a  plain 
front  of  three  stories  with  a  projecting 
bay  over  the  portal,  and  angle  towers. 
The  window  openings  are  all  of  the 
broad  mullioned  Elizabethan  type,  and 
the  fagade  as  a  whole  would  be  admi- 
rable if  it  had  nothing  more.  But  the 
Renaissance  ideas  led  the  designer  to 
crown  each  story  with  an  entablature,  and 
to  set  a  pair  of  classic  columns  on  either 
side  of  the  central  bay,  and  in  each  tower 
angle.  To  cover  these  useless  columns 
the  entablature  has  to  be  broken  into 
deep  ressauts,  and  the  three  superimposed 
pairs  carry  nothing  but  a  pedestal  block 
above  the  main  cornice,  the  several  ped- 
estal blocks  being  connected  by  a  balus- 
trade. 

^  Gotch,  plate  92. 


Fig.    131.  —  Cranljorne 
Manor-House. 


XIII  THE  REN-AISSANCE  IIV  ENGLAND  223 

The  gatehouse  of  Stanway  ^  has  a  portal  with  a  four-centred 
arch  framed  with  a  shallow  Doric  order,  having  a  pilaster  with 
a  free-standing  column  in  front  of  it  on  either  side.  The  entab- 
lature has  a  double  ressaut  over  each  of  these  compound  mem- 
bers, and  a  curved  pediment  over  the  entablature  is  likewise 
broken  into  ressauts.  A  rectangular  tablet  with  an  escutcheon, 
surmounted  by  a  smaller  pediment,  breaks  through  the  middle 
of  the  larger  pediment,  and  acroteria  are  set  on  its  sides,  while 
a  keystone  in  the  arch  carries  a  shallow  ressaut  in  the  entabla- 
ture. The  front  of  Westwood  Park^  is  for  the  most  part  free 
from  foreign  elements,  but  it  has  a  porch  in  the  form  of  a  Roman 
triumphal  arch  with  three  openings,  and  a  Corinthian  order  of 
almost  correct  ancient  proportions. 

A  remarkable  illustration  of  the  architectural  taste  of  this 
time  is  afforded  by  the  well-known  Gate  of  Honour  at  Caius 
College,  Cambridge.  A  triumphal  arch  scheme  with  an  Ionic 
order,  a  Tudor  arch,  no  openings  in  the  lateral  bays,  and  no 
attic,  is  surmounted  with  a  Greek  temple  front  of  an  engaged 
Corinthian  order  raised  on  tall  pedestals  connected  by  an  en- 
gaged balustrade.  This  embraces  in  width  only  the  central  bay 
of  the  substructure,  and  solid  abutments  of  concave  outline  are 
carried  up  over  the  side  bays.  A  plain  attic  over  the  pediment 
of  the  temple  forms  the  base  for  a  square  pyramid  intersected 
by  a  tall  hexagon,  surmounted  with  a  hexagonal  dome.  No 
voids,  except  the  central  opening  under  the  Tudor  arch, 
break  the  solid  mass,  but  the  wall  surfaces  are  ornamented 
with  disks,  niches,  entablatures,  and  small  pediments  in  relief; 
and  the  pedestals  of  the  temple  order  are  carried  on  corbels  and 
ressauts  in  the  lower  entablature. 

Of  the  many  English  houses  built  at  the  close  of  the  six- 
teenth century,  few  are  more  tasteless  and  pretentious  than 
Wollaton  Hall,^  built  by  Sir  Francis  Willoughby  "at  great 
expense,  it  was  said,  for  a  foolish  display  of  his  wealth."  An 
order  of  coupled  pilasters,  broken  in  the  middle  by  salient  blocks, 
adorn  each  story,  while  vacant  niches  in  the  upper  stories  break 
the  narrow  wall  surfaces  between  the  pilasters  on  either  side  of 
the  large  mullioned  windows.  The  chimney-stacks  are,  as  in 
Longford  Castle,  shaped  in  the  semblance  of  pseudo-Doric 
columns,   and  the  square  angle  pavilions  have  their   cornices 

1  Gotch,  plate  82.  2  7^,7/^  pi^te  86.  »  Ibid.,  plate  143. 


224 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


adorned  with  false  pediments  of  capricious  outline  and  strap- 
work  ornamentation,  flanked  by  obelisks  on  tall  pedestals.  One 
other  feature  of  this  remarkable  design  is  perhaps  worthy 
of  notice,  namely,  the  portal  of  the  north  front.  This  portal 
has  a  low  arch,  and  is  sheltered  by  a  porch  in  the  form  of 
a  massive  free-standing  Doric  order,  the  shafts  of  which  are 
broken  in  the  middle  by  a  salient  drum,  and  the  middle  of  the 
entablature  is  supported  by  a  heavy  console  which  forms,  at  the 

same  time,  a  monstrous  key- 
stone to  the  arch  (Fig.  132). 
It  is  unnecessary  further 
to  multiply  examples.  While 
one  great  house  of  the  period 
differs  from  another  in  un- 
important ways,  those  in 
which  ornaments  are  exten- 
sively applied  are  without  ex- 
ception disfigured  by  them. 
The  Elizabethan  architec- 
tural ornamentation  is  at 
once  pretentious  and  gro- 
tesquely ugly.  It  was  only 
in  so  far  as  they  held  to  a 
straightforward  provision  for 
domestic  needs,  and  avoided 
architectural  pretensions, 
that  the  English  people  of 
the  Elizabethan  Age  pro- 
duced really  good  domestic 
architecture. 

Toward  the  close  of  the  sixteenth  century  many  Flemish  and 
Dutch  ornamental  workers  had  come  into  England,  and  had 
brought  in  the  tasteless  forms  of  design  that  had  been  current 
with  them.  The  ungrammatical  and  inelegant  misuse  of  the 
orders,  and  the  meaningless  barocco  scrollwork,  with  which  the 
EUzabethan  houses  were  overloaded,  may  be  largely  due  to 
them.  But  these  modes  of  design  were  readily  assimilated  by 
the  native  English  workmen,  and  approved  by  the  aristocratic 
.  English  taste.  The  architect,  in  the  more  modern  sense,  did  not 
yet  exist.     The  design  and  execution  of  these  buildings  were  in 


Fig.  132. —  Portal  of  WoUaton  Hall. 


XIII  THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  225 

the  hands  of  the  master  builders.  No  complete  drawings  were 
prepared  in  advance.  Only  the  general  scheme  in  rough 
sketches  of  plans  and  elevations  was  furnished,  and  these  were 
freely  modified,  and  the  details  developed,  as  the  work  pro- 
ceeded under  the  direction  of  the  master  mason.  It  was  a  sur- 
vival of  the  mediaeval  system,  and  no  better  system  could  be 
devised  so  long  as  the  workmen  were  suitably  trained  to  their 
craft,  worked  together  on  traditional  lines,  and  were  governed 
by  a  common  understanding,  common  aims,  and  a  strong  feeUng 
of  artistic  fellowship.  But  the  Elizabethan  workmen  were  not 
thus  associated  and  governed.  The  older  traditions  of  design 
had  been  largely  lost,  and  the  builders  were  attempting  to 
use  architectural  forms  which  they  did  not  understand.  The 
aberrations  that  resulted  from  the  efforts  of  these  craftsmen 
to  use  the  classic  orders  were  ludicrous,  as  we  have  abundantly 
seen.  The  orders  were  entirely  foreign  to  the  genius  and  to 
the  requirements  of  the  English  people,  and  were  altogether 
out  of  place  in  English  house  building.  Their  departure  from 
their  own  proper  traditions  and  architectural  habits  at  length 
weakened  the  building  craftsmen,  so  that  they  finally  lost  their 
occupation  with  the  rise  of  the  modern  professional  architect, 
who  first  appeared  in  England  in  the  person  of  Inigo  Jones, 
whose  work  we  may  consider  in  the  next  chapter. 


CHAPTER   XIV 

ARCHITECTURE    OF    THE    RENAISSANCE    IN    ENGLAND 

II.  Jones  and  Wren 

It  is  only  by  extension  of  the  term  that  the  architecture  of 
England  in  the  seventeenth  century  may  be  properly  called 
Renaissance.  But  if,  in  architecture,  we  understand  by  Renais- 
sance a  revival  of  the  use  of  classic  details,  such  extension  is 
justifiable,  for  in  this  architecture  the  use  of  classic  details  is 
becoming  established,  and  the  art  of  Jones  and  Wren  stands  in 
relation  to  the  Elizabethan  architecture  as  the  art  of  Vignola 
and  Palladio  does  to  that  of  the  early  Renaissance  in  Italy,  and 
that  of  Lescot  and  De  I'Orme  to  the  early  French  Renaissance. 

Inigo  Jones  and  Sir  Christopher  Wren  were  the  only  Eng- 
lish architects  of  great  importance  at  this  epoch.  It  was  their 
genius  that  determined  the  character  of  modern  English  archi- 
tecture, and  we  may  therefore  confine  our  attention  to  their 
works. 

Of  Jones,  Horace  Walpole  thus  speaks  in  his  Anecdotes  of 
Painting:^  "  Inigo  Jones,  ...  if  a  table  of  fame  like  that  in 
the  Tatler  were  to  be  framed  for  men  of  indisputable  genius  in 
every  country,  would  save  England  from  the  disgrace  of  not 
having  her  representative  among  the  arts.  .  .  .  Vitruvius  drew 
up  his  grammar,  Palladio  showed  him  the  practice,  Rome  dis- 
played a  theatre  worthy  of  his  emulation,  and  King  Charles  was 
ready  to  encourage,  employ,  and  reward  his  talents."  This  famous 
architect  began  his  artistic  career  in  the  early  part  of  the  seven- 
teenth century.  Nothing  is  known  of  his  early  education,  but 
in  youth  he  appears  to  have  manifested  an  inclination  for  draw- 
ing, and  to  have  acquired  some  skill  in  landscape  painting.^  He 
does  not  seem  to  have  had  any  systematic  training  in  architecture, 

1  Vol.  2,  p.  260. 

2  Cunningham's  Lives  of  the  Most  Eminent  British  Painters,  Sculptors,  and 
Architects,  vol.  4,  p.  71. 

226 


CHAP.  XIV  THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  227 

but  in  early  life  he  travelled  in  Italy/  where  he  studied  the 
ancient  monuments  and  read  the  works  of  Palladio  and  other 
Italian  authors.  In  a  book  entitled  StoneJienge  Restored^  he 
says :  "  Being  naturally  inclined  in  my  younger  years  to  study 
the  arts  of  design,  I  passed  into  foreign  parts  to  converse  with 
the  great  masters  thereof  in  Italy,  where  I  applied  myself  to 
search  out  the  ruins  of  those  ancient  buildings  which,  in  despite 
of  time  itself,  and  violence  of  barbarians,  are  yet  remaining. 
Having  satisfied  myself  in  these,  and  returning  to  my  native 
country,  I  applied  my  mind  more  particularly  to  the  study  of 
architecture."  For  a  quick-witted  man  with  architectural  apti- 
tudes no  training  could  be  better,  except  that  of  growing  up  in 
an  atmosphere  of  building  activity,  as  the  craftsmen  of  the 
Middle  Ages  did. 

In  his  first  practice  Jones  appears  to  have  worked  in  a  mixed 
style.  The  mongrel  Elizabethan  art  was  still  in  full  vogue,  and 
with  this  style,  says  Cunningham,  "  Inigo  compounded,  and  for 
some  time  persevered  in  what  the  wits  of  the  succeeding  age 
nicknamed  King  James's  Gothic."  The  well-known  porch  of  St. 
Mary's  church,  Oxford,  if  it  be  by  Jones,  may  furnish  an  example 
of  this  earlier  style.  But  he  soon  sought  to  free  himself  from  the 
vagaries  of  the  Elizabethan  craftsman,  and  strove  to  introduce  a 
rigorous  use  of  Palladian  forms.  He  had  learned  the  grammar 
of  the  orders  as  formulated  by  the  architects  of  the  later  Renais- 
sance, and  had  apparently  conceived  a  sincere  belief  that  the 
Palladian  canons  embodied  all  that  was  most  excellent  in  archi- 
tectural design.  He  saw  in  the  Elizabethan  art  only  its  mani- 
fold infractions  of  the  rules  of  order  and  proportion,  and  its 
grotesque  distortions  of  classic  forms.  To  reestablish  these 
rules  and  restore  these  forms  appeared  to  him  the  way  to 
regenerate   English  art. 

First  among  his  extant  works  that  can  be  certainly  identified 
is  the  well-known  Banqueting  Hall  built  in  16 19,  for  King 
James  I,  as  a  part  of  the  projected  palace  of  Whitehall,  for 
which  he  had  prepared  the  plans  on  a  vast  scale.  The  first 
remark  prompted  by  this  design  is  that  it  is  not  at  all  EngHsh. 

^  Cunningham,  op.  cit.,  p.  76. 

2  A  work  undertaken  at  the  ref|uest  of  the  king,  in  which  Jones  reaches  the 
astonishing  conclusion  that  in  Stonehenge  we  have  the  remains  of  a  Roman  temple 
of  the  Tuscan  order,     Cf.  Cunningham,  p.  106  et  seq. 


228  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

Every  form  and  feature  of  the  native  art  is  eliminated.  The 
EHzabethan  house,  however  overlaid  with  foreign  elements,  was 
English  in  its  primary  forms  and  expression.  But  here  Inigo 
Jones  swept  away  everything  English,  and  substituted  a  Palla- 
dian  scheme  that  is  foreign  to  England  in  every  particular.  The 
low-pitched  roof,  the  plain  rectangular  outline,  and  the  narrow 
undivided  window  openings  are  as  Italian  as  the  orders  with 
which  the  fagade  is  overlaid.  But  such  was  the  state  of  taste 
among  the  influential  classes  that  these  features  were  ap- 
proved, and  the  design  was  applauded  with  acclamation.  "It 
spread,"  says  Cunningham,  "the  love  of  classic  architecture  far 
and  wide,  and  there  was  soon  a  growing  demand  for  works 
which  recalled  Athens  to  the  learned,  and  presented  something 
new  to  the  admiration  of  the  vulgar."^  The  learned  had  then 
small  knowledge  of  Athenian  architecture,  and  even  now  many 
learned  people  fail  to  consider  that  there  was  never  in  Athens 
anything  at  all  like  Palladian  design. 

The  fagade  of  the  Banqueting  Hall  (Plate  X)  is  in  two  stories 
on  a  low  basement,  and  has  a  rusticated  wall  of  smooth-faced  ma- 
sonry, with  an  engaged  order  in  each  story,  and  a  parapet  with 
a  balustrade  over  the  main  cornice.  The  central  part  of  this 
facade  has  its  wall  slightly  advanced,  and  in  each  story  the 
orders,  Ionic  and  Corinthian  respectively,  have  engaged  columns 
against  the  projecting  middle  part,  and  pilasters  on  either 
side,  a  pair  of  them  being  set  together  at  each  end.  These 
pilasters  taper  and  have  strong  entasis,  so  that  parts  of  those 
on  the  angles  overreach  the  end  walls.  The  entablatures  are 
carried  by  the  walls,  and  thus  have  to  be  broken  into  ressauts 
to  cover  the  columns  and  pilasters.  The  structural  function  of 
all  these  superimposed  columns  and  pilasters  is  therefore  only 
that  of  carrying  the  ressauts  of  the  parapet.  The  rectangular 
windows,  of  severely  classic  design,  have  pediments,  alternately 
curved  and  angular,  in  the  lower  story,  and  flat  cornices  only  in 
the  story  above,  while  a  frieze  below  the  main  entablature  is 
adorned  in  Roman  fashion  with  masks  and  festoons. 

It  is  surprising  that  such  a  mechanical  reproduction  of  a 
foreign  style  should  ever  have  called  forth  high  praise  from 
Englishmen.  The  design  exhibits  no  invention,  no  creative 
adaptation  of  foreign  elements  to  new  conditions,  and  therefore 

1  Cunningham,  op.  cit.,  p.  115. 


XIV  THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  229 

no  reason  for  the  use  of  such  elements.  The  low-pitched  roof 
(wholly  invisible  from  any  near  point  of  view)  is  unsuited  to  the 
English  climate,  and  the  parapet  and  balustrade  are  equally 
inappropriate.  Yet  of  this  design  Walpole  remarks  ^  that  "  it 
stands  as  a  model  of  the  most  pure  and  beautiful  taste."  And 
an  earlier  expression  of  the  feeling  which  prevailed  among  the 
dilettanti  of  the  time  is  found  in  the  text  which  accompanies 
Kent's  well-known  book  of  Jones's  designs  ^  as  follows  :  "  If  the 
reputation  of  this  great  man  doth  not  rise  in  proportion  to  his 
merits  in  his  own  country,  'tis  certain,  in  Italy,  which  was  his 
school,  and  other  Parts  of  Europe,  he  was  in  great  esteem  ;  in 
which  places,  as  well  as  in  England,  his  own  works  are  his 
monument  and  best  Panegyrick ;  which,  together  with  those  of 
Palladio,  remain  equal  Proofs  of  the  Superiority  of  those  two 
great  Masters  to  all  others." 

The  whole  scheme  for  the  palace  of  Whitehall  is  fully  illus- 
trated by  Kent.^  The  plan  is  a  vast  rectangle  measuring  874 
by  1 1 5 1  feet,  and  comprising  seven  courts,  of  which  the  central 
one  toward  the  park  encloses  a  circular  gallery.  The  long 
blocks  are  broken  by  rectangular  pavilions,  one  on  the  axis  of 
each  of  the  four  sides,  one  at  each  angle,  and  others  at  intervals 
between.  It  is  thus  French  in  character,  rather  than  Italian, 
and  suggests  a  derivation  from  De  I'Orme's  plan  of  the  Tuileries. 
It  is  not  worth  while  to  examine  the  architectural  character  of 
the  elevation  fully  in  detail ;  but,  in  addition  to  the  Banqueting 
Hall  already  noticed,  it  may  be  well  to  examine  several  other 
parts  which  further  illustrate  the  art  of  Inigo  Jones.  The 
axial  pavilions  are  flanked  with  rectangular  towers  in  three 
stages,  each  stage  adorned  with  an  order,  and  surmounted  with 
an  octagonal  cupola.  On  the  Westminster  front  the  basement 
has  a  Doric  order  with  a  modification  of  De  I'Orme's  column,  in 
which  the  larger  stones  are  square.  This  basement  (Fig.  133) 
has  a  mezzanine  marked  by  an  entablature  which  is  cut  in  the 
middle  by  the  keystones  of  a  flat  arch  over  a  window  beneath. 
The  great  entablature  in  this  case  is  borne  by  the  columns,  and 
the  order  has  thus  a  structural  character  (though  it  has  no  struc- 

1  Cunningham,  op.  cit.,  vol.  2,  p.  266. 

^  The  Designs  of  Inigo  Jones,  consisting  of  Plans  and  Elevations  for  Publick  and 
Private  Buildings,  by  William  Kent,  London,  1727. 
*  Plates  I  to  52  inclusive. 


230 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP, 


tural  reason  for  being)  which  the  orders  of  the  Banqueting  Hall 
do  not  have.  The  only  other  feature  of  Whitehall  that  need 
be  mentioned  is  the  fa9ade  of  the  circular  court  enclosed  by  the 
king's  apartments.  This  is  a  bizarre  design  in  two  stages, 
with  a  so-called  Persian  order  below  and  an  order  of  caryatids 
above.  The  bearing  members  of  these  orders  stand  out  beyond 
the  entablatures,  and  thus  support  nothing  but  ressauts,  while  a 
balustrade  with  statues  crowns  the  whole. 


Fig,  133.  —  Basement  of  a  part  of  Whitehall. 


With  all  his  zeal  for  reform  by  a  stricter  conformity  to 
classic  models,  the  designs  of  Inigo  Jones  were  never  truly 
classical,  and  they  often  exhibit  ludicrous  aberrations.  He  had 
no  true  conception  of  the  principles  of  classic  art,  as  no  archi- 
tects of  the  Renaissance  ever  had.  The  Palladian  architecture, 
which  he  mainly  strove  to  follow,  was  itself,  as  we  have  seen, 
far  from  true  to  classic  design.  Some  of  these  aberrations  are 
strikingly  shown  in  the  west  front  which  he  built  to  the  nave 
of  old  St.  Paul's  cathedral.  In  attempting  to  apply  classic 
details  to  such  a  building  he  was  obliged  to  depart  widely  from 


XIV 


THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND 


2^1 


classic  principles.  His  scheme,  as  shown  in  Kent's  print 
(Fig.  134)  is  as  incongruous  a  mixture  as  was  ever  produced  by 
the  Elizabethan  craftsmen.  This  front,  in  its  main  outline,  has 
to  follow  the  form  of  the  Mediaeval  structure,  with  its  high  nave 
and  low  aisles.  To  this  mediaeval  form  the  architect  has  affixed 
a  variety  of  features  derived   from    Roman,  Renaissance,  and 


Fig.  134.  —  Front  of  old  St.  Paul's  by  Inigo  Jones. 

even  Egyptian  sources.  He  has  crowned  the  wall  with  a  pseudo- 
classic  cornice  surmounted  by  a  steep  gable,  he  has  set  obelisks  on 
Roman  pedestals  over  the  buttresses,  affixed  reversed  consoles  to 
the  clerestory  walls,  and  built  a  Corinthian  portico  with  a  balus- 
trade upon  its  entablature,  and  completed  the  scheme  with  flank- 
ing towers  crowned  with  lanterns.  It  is  a  thoroughly  barbarous 
composition,  which  even  Walpole  complains  of  as  follows  :   "  In 


232  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

the  restoration  of  that  cathedral  he  made  two  capital  faults. 
He  first  renewed  the  sides  with  very  bad  Gothic,  and  then  added 
a  Roman  portico,  magnificent  and  beautiful  indeed,  but  which 
has  no  affinity  with  the  ancient  parts  that  remained,  and  made 
his  own  Gothic  appear  ten  times  heavier."  ^ 

The  art  of  Inigo  Jones  has  been  thoughtlessly  lauded  in 
more  recent  times.  "  His  special  strength,"  says  Mr.  Bloom- 
field,  his  latest  panegyrist,  "lay  in  his  thorough  mastery  of 
proportion,  his  contempt  for  mere  prettiness,  and  the  rare  dis- 
tinction of  his  style.  His  own  theory  of  architecture  was  that, 
in  his  own  words,  "it  should  be  solid,  proportional  according 
to  the  rules,  masculine  and  unaffected."  ^  Was  Inigo  Jones 
a  master  of  proportion  .-*  Does  he  not  in  this  declaration  betray 
a  fundamental  misconception  of  the  true  meaning  of  proportion  .-* 
Is  any  genuine  work  of  art  "  proportional  according  to  the 
rules,"  i.e.  the  mechanical  formulas  of  Vitruvius  or  Palladio  on 
which  he  professed  to  base  his  practice  }  And  did  Jones  ever 
carry  out  in  practice  his  avowed  theory  that  architecture  should 
be  unaffected .-'  Can  an  art  be  unaffected  which  is  so  frankly 
copied  from  a  foreign  style  .■'  I  have  characterized  the  spirit  of 
much  of  the  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  as  theatrical ;  that 
of  Inigo  Jones  is  preeminently  so,  and  it  is  significant  that  he 
was  extensively  employed,  in  his  early  career,  in  designing 
architectural  backgrounds  for  the  stage. 

The  artistic  career  of  Sir  Christopher  Wren,  the  most  justly 
famous  architect  of  the  belated  English  Renaissance,  began 
after  the  Civil  War.  Inigo  Jones  had  prepared  the  way  for 
him,  and  a  body  of  aristocratic  dilettanti,  ardently  devoted  to 
the  neo-classic  propaganda,  had  arisen.  The  artistic  notions  of 
these  people  are  instructively  set  forth  in  the  following  passage 
from  Parentalia:  ^  "  Towards  the  end  of  King  James  I's  Reign, 
and  in  the  Beginning  of  his  Son's,  Taste  in  Architecture  made 
a  bold  step  from  Italy  to  England  at  once,  and  scarce  staid 
a  moment  to  visit  France  by  the  way.  From  the  most  pro- 
found Ignorance  in  Architecture,  the  most  consummate  Night 

1  Op.  «■/.,  p.  265. 

^  A  History  of  Renaissance  Architecture  in  England,  by  Reginald  Bloomfield, 
London,  1897,  vol.  i,  p.  122. 

8  Parentalia,  or  Memoir  of  the  Family  of  the  Wrens,  by  Christopher  Wren, 
London,  1750,  pp.  269-270. 


XIV  THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  233 

of  Knowledge,  Inigo  Jones  started  up,  a  Prodigy  of  Art,  and 
vied  even  with  his  Master  Palladio  himself.  From  so  glorious 
an  Out-set,  there  was  not  any  Excellency  that  we  might  not 
have  hoped  to  obtain ;  Britain  had  a  reasonable  Prospect  to 
rival  Italy,  and  foil  every  Nation  in  Europe  beside.  But  in  the 
midst  of  these  sanguine  Expectations,  the  fatal  Civil  War  com- 
menced, and  all  the  Arts  and  Sciences  were  immediately  laid 
aside." 

Before  turning  his  attention  to  architecture  Wren  had  been 
a  distinguished  scholar  at  Oxford,  where  he  was  appointed 
Professor  of  Astronomy  in  the  year  1657.  It  was  not  until 
mature  manhood  that  he  began  the  practice  of  architecture,  and 
thus,  like  so  many  others  who  have  achieved  distinction  in  this 
art,  he  never  had  a  special  and  systematic  preliminary  training 
for  it.  His  father,  Dr.  Christopher  Wren,  Dean  of  Windsor,  is 
said  to  have  been  skilled  in  all  branches  of  mathematics  and  in 
architecture,^  and  this,  together  with  his  own  native  aptitudes, 
appears  to  have  made  it  easy  for  him,  by  observation  and 
practice,  to  acquire  the  necessary  preparation  for  such  work 
as  he  was  to  do.  His  opportunities  for  study  of  the  architec- 
tural monuments  of  the  Continent  were  small.  He  never  visited 
Italy,  but  he  spent  some  months  in  Paris,  and  while  there  wrote, 
in  a  letter  to  a  friend,  as  follows  :  "  I  have  busied  myself  sur- 
veying the  most  esteem'd  Fabricks  of  Paris,  and  the  Country 
round ;  the  Louvre  for  a  while  was  my  daily  Object,  where  no 
less  than  a  thousand  Hands  are  constantly  employ'd  in  the 
Works ;  some  in  laying  mighty  foundations,  some  in  raising  the 
stories,  columns,  entablements,  &c.,  with  vast  stones,  by  great 
and  useful  Engines ;  others  in  Carving,  Inlaying  of  Marbles, 
Plastering,  Painting,  Gilding,  &c.,  which  altogether  make  a 
school  of  Architecture,  the  best  probably,  at  this  Day  in 
Europe."  The  Italian  architect  Bernini  was  working  on  the 
Louvre  at  the  time,  and  in  the  same  letter  Wren  writes : 
"  Mons.  Abbe  Charles  introduc'd  me  to  the  acquaintance  of 
Bernini,  who  shew'd  me  his  Designs  of  the  Louvre,  and  of  the 
King's  Statue.  .  .  .  Bernini's  Design  of  the  Louvre  I  would 
have  given  my  skin  for,  but  the  reserv'd  Italian  gave  me  but 
a  few  Minutes  View ;  it  was  five  little  Designs  on  paper,  for 
which  he  hath  receiv'd  as  many  thousand  Pistoles ;  I  had  only 

1  Parentalia,  p.  142. 


234  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

time  to  copy  it  in  my  Fancy  and  Memory.  I  shall  be  able  by 
Discourse,  and  Crayon,  to  give  you  a  tolerable  Account  of  it."  ^ 

He  appears  to  have  made  the  most  of  his  time  while  in 
France,  but  he  naturally  confined  his  attention  to  the  modern 
works  of  that  country,  which  alone  were  then  thought  worthy 
of  notice.  The  great  chateaux  of  Fontainebleau,  St.  Germains, 
Chantilly,  and  many  others,  he  speaks  of  in  the  same  letter  as 
having  "  surveyed  that  I  might  not  lose  the  impressions  of 
them." 

Wren's  first  architectural  work  appears  to  have  been  the 
Sheldonian  Theatre  in  Oxford,  which  is  thus  referred  to  in 
Parentalia :  "  This  Theatre,  a  work  of  admirable  Contrivance 
and  Magnificence,  was  the  first  publick  Performance  of  the 
Surveyor,^  in  Architecture ;  which,  however,  had  been  executed 
in  a  greater  and  better  style,  with  a  view  to  the  ancient  Roman 
Grandeur  discernable  in  the  Theatre  of  Marcellus  at  Rome,  but 
that  he  was  obliged  to  put  a  Stop  to  the  bolder  strokes  of  his 
Pencil,  and  confine  the  Expense  within  the  Limits  of  a  private 
Purse."  ^  But  his  great  opportunity  occurred  after  the  fire  of 
London,  when  he  was  commissioned  to  prepare  plans  for  the 
rebuilding  of  the  city,  including  the  cathedral  of  St.  Paul  and 
all  the  city  churches.  Before  the  great  fire  he  had  been  or- 
dered to  submit  designs  for  the  restoration  of  the  old  cathedral 
of  St.  Paul,  the  grand  old  Norman  structure,  with  additions  in 
the  early  English  style,  which,  notwithstanding  the  repairs  and 
additions  of  Inigo  Jones,  was  still  thought  to  be  in  a  dangerous 
condition.  Wren  made  a  careful  survey,  and  worked  out  a  plan, 
elevation,  and  section  of  the  old  structure,  and  expressed  sur- 
prise at  what  he  considered  the  negligence  of  the  old  builders. 
"  They  valued  not  exactness  :  some  Inter-columns  were  one  inch 
and  a  half  too  large,  others  as  much,  or  more,  too  little.  Nor 
were  they  true  in  their  levels."  *  He  thought  that  the  whole 
fabric  was  alarmingly  insecure,  except  the  portico  built  by 
Jones,  which,  he  said,  "being  an  entire  and  excellent  piece, 
gave  great  reputation  to  the  work  in  the  first  repairs."^ 

He  prepared  plans  for  a  thorough  restoration,  but  these  were 

1  Parentalia,  pp.  261-262. 

2  Wren  had  been  appointed  surveyor-general  and  principal  architect  of  the  city 
of  London  after  the  great  fire. 

3  Parentalia,  p.  335.  *  Ibid. ,  p.  273.  *  Ibid.,  p.  277. 


XIV  THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  235 

not  approved,  and  he  set  off  for  France.  Then  came  the  great 
fire  and  put  an  end  to  all  thought  of  repairs  on  his  part,  though 
the  commissioners  appear  still  to  have  clung  to  the  idea  of  res- 
toration until  they  were  satisfied,  by  fruitless  effort  to  utilize 
what  remained  of  the  old  work,  that  such  a  course  was  imprac- 
ticable.^ 

An  entirely  new  structure  was  now  decided  on,  and  Wren 
was  directed  to  "  contrive  a  Fabrick  of  moderate  Bulk,  but  of 
good  Proportions ;  a  convenient  Quire,  with  a  Vestibule  and 
Porticoes,  and  a  Dome  conspicuous  above  the  Houses.  A  long 
Body  with  aisles  was  thought  impertinent,  our  Religion  not 
using  Processions."^ 

It  is  difficult  from  the  statements  in  Parentalia  clearly  to 
identify  Wren's  different  drawings  which  have  been  preserved, 
and  to  reconcile  either  the  statements  or  the  drawings  with 
what  is  said  by  more  recent  writers,  who  do  not  always  agree 
among  themselves.  The  drawings  embody  widely  different 
schemes  which  were  the  results  of  so  many  attempts  to  meet 
the  wishes  of  the  king  and  court  on  the  one  hand,  and  those 
of  the  citizens  on  the  other.  Of  these  there  are  two  sets  which 
may  be  considered  as  the  principal  ones. 

The  first  of  these  has  a  novel  plan  based  on  that  of  the 
Greek  cross,  but  having  the  reentrant  external  angles  filled 
out  to  segmental  curves  struck  from  the  corners  of  a  square 
enclosing  the  whole.  A  great  dome  on  a  circular  drum 
supported  by  eight  piers  rises  over  the  crossing,  a  small  dome 
on  pendentives  covers  each  of  the  spaces  between  the  great 
circle  and  the  curved  enclosing  walls ;  while  the  northern, 
southern,  and  western  arms  of  the  cross  have  each  a  square 
groined  vault.  The  form  of  the  vaulting  over  the  eastern  arm 
is  not  indicated  on  the  plan,  but  the  choir  enclosure  is  shown  in 
the  form  of  a  circle  cut  out  on  the  east  to  open  into  the  sanc- 
tuary, and  on  the  west  to  communicate  with  the  nave.  The 
dome  (Fig.  135)  is  in  two  shells  of  masonry,  the  inner  one 
being  hemispherical  with  a  circular  opening  in  its  crown,  and 
the  outer  one  a  pointed  oval  supporting  a  lantern.  The  drum 
is  thick,  and  although  the  vault  springs  from  very  near  the 
top,  a  strong  continuous  abutment  in  the  form  of  a  solid  ring 
of  masonry,  with  concave  outline,  is  built  up  against  it.     The 

1  Parentalia,  p.  278.  ^  /l,iJ_^  p,  281. 


236 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


dome  is  kept  solid  up  to  the  haunch  of  the  inner  shell,  so  that 
this  inner  shell  is  abundantly  secured,  while  the  outline  of  the 
outer  shell,  from  the  point  where  it  clears  the  solid  mass  below, 
has  a  form  that  would  exert  a  minimum  of  thrust,  though  it 
would  hardly  be  secure  without  a  binding  chain.  It  is  notice- 
able that  the  inner  face  of  the  drum  is  not  vertical,  but  inclined 


Fig.  135.  —  Section  of  Wren's  rejected  scheme  for  St.  Paul's. 


inward  in  the  form  of  a  truncated  cone,  which  considerably 
strengthens  it  against  any  tendency  to  yield  to  the  force  of 
thrust  in  the  dome. 

The  scheme  was  clearly  based  on  the  model  of  St.  Peter's  in 
Rome,  to  which  frequent  reference  is  made  in  Parentalia  as 
having  been  in  the  mind  of  the  architect  as  he  developed  his 
idea.  The  dome  partakes  of  the  character  of  Bramante's  design 
on  the  one  hand,  and  of  that  of  Michael  Angelo,  as  finally  con- 
structed, on  the  other.  The  likeness  to  Bramante's  scheme 
(Fig.  23,  p.  48)  is  in  the  form  of  the  inner  shell,  and  its  adjust- 
ment to  the  supporting  drum.     The  likeness  as  to  adjustment  is 


XIV  THE  REN'AISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  lyj 

not,  indeed,  very  close ;  for  Wren  has  raised  the  springing  so 
that  it  is  almost  at  the  top  of  the  drum,  but  he  has  fortified  it 
with  a  continuous  abutment  which,  though  of  different  outline, 
has  substantially  the  same  structural  effect.  The  Hkeness  to  St. 
Peter's  is  further  shown  in  the  encircling  order  of  the  inner  face 
of  the  drum,  which  occurs  in  both  Bramante's  scheme  and  in 
that  of  Michael  Angelo.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  Wren 
had  studied  Bramante's  design  in  Serlio's  book,  and  had  appre- 
ciated its  structural  merits.  But  he  wished,  in  emulation  of 
Michael  Angelo,  to  make  his  dome  externally  more  imposing, 
and  he  therefore  raised  its  springing  level  as  we  see,  and 
adopted  from  Michael  Angelo's  scheme  the  idea  of  a  double 
dome.  The  external  outline  from  the  top  of  the  drum  to  the 
haunch  of  the  vault  is  too  nearly  the  same  as  the  correspond- 
ing part  of  Michael  Angelo's  design  to  be  considered  as  an 
accidental  coincidence.  The  structural  difference  between  the 
two  is  indeed  great,  since  the  concave  portion  in  Wren's 
design  is  a  continuous  ring,  while  in  that  of  Michael  Angelo 
it  is  an  isolated  and  insignificant  abutment.  Wren's  scheme  is 
thus  superior  in  point  of  constructive  merit,  since  it  provides 
continuous  resistance  to  continuous  thrust.  It  will  be  seen 
that  the  two  shells  of  Wren's  projected  dome  correspond  to 
the  inner  and  outer  shells  of  Michael  Angelo's  model  (Fig.  26, 
p.  54),  and  thus  in  reproducing  the  main  idea  of  this  model 
Wren  merely  omitted  the  middle  shell.  He  thus  gave  a  wider 
divergence  to  the  two  vaults  as  they  rise  than  occurs  in  the 
actual  dome  of  St.  Peter's.  He  also  omitted  the  well  which  in 
St.  Peter's  connects  the  two  shells  at  the  crown. 

A  single  order  of  pilasters  adorns  both  the  interior  and  the 
exterior  of  the  church  itself,  the  one  on  the  outside  being  raised 
on  a  high  basement  and  crowned  with  a  plain  attic ;  and  a  por- 
tico in  the  form  of  a  temple  front,  with  its  order  raised  on  high 
pedestals,  gives  emphasis  to  the  west  fagade. 

This  design  appears  to  have  been  rejected,  to  Wren's  great 
chagrin,  as  we  learn  from  the  following  passage  in  Parcntalia: 
"  The  surveyor  in  private  conversation,  always  seem'd  to  set  a 
higher  value  on  this  design,  than  any  he  had  made  before  or 
since ;  as  what  was  labour'd  with  more  study  and  success ;  and, 
(had  he  not  been  over-rul'd  by  those,  whom  it  was  his  duty  to 
obey),  what  he  would  have  put  in  execution  with  more  Cheerful- 


238  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

ness,  and  Satisfaction  to  himself.  .  .  .  But  the  Chapter,  and 
some  others  of  the  Clergy  thought  the  Model  not  enough  of  a 
Cathedral-fashion;  to  instance  particularly,  in  that,  the  Quire 
was  design'd  circular,  &c.  .  .  .  The  Surveyor  then  turn'd  his 
Thoughts  to  a  Cathedral-form,  (as  they  call'd  it)  but  so  rectified, 
as  to  reconcile,  as  near  as  possible,  the  Gothick  to  a  better  Man- 
ner of  Architecture  ;  with  a  Cupola,  and  above  that,  instead  of  a 
Lantern,  a  lofty  Spire,  and  large  Porticoes." 

I  think  that  had  the  first  design  been  accepted  Wren  would 
not  have  carried  it  out  without  material  modifications.  For  he 
was  too  good  an  engineer  not  to  have  seen  that  the  form  and 
adjustment  of  the  dome  were  seriously  defective  from  a  struc- 
tural point  of  view.  However  this  may  be,  the  dome  which  he 
actually  built  is,  as  we  shall  see,  fundamentally  different  in 
character  (though  it  is  not  very  different  in  either  internal  or 
external  shape),  and  it  is  different  in  a  way  that  no  outside 
influences  could  have  compelled. 

The  most  noticeable  feature  of  the  second  design  is  that  part 
which  rises  over  the  crossing,  and  consists  of  a  vast  frustum 
of  a  dome  supporting  a  tall  buttressed  drum,  which  in  turn 
is  surmounted  by  a  smaller  dome  of  oval  outline,  from  the 
crown  of  which  rises  a  telescopic  spire  of  six  stages  with  a 
strongly  marked  cornice  to  each.  It  was  in  this  design  that  he 
is  said  to  have  sought  to  "  reconcile  the  Gothic  to  a  better  Man- 
ner." What  he  meant  by  this  I  do  not  know.  Wren  can 
hardly  have  supposed  that  he  was  effecting  such  a  reconcilia- 
tion by  this  remarkable  combination  of  dome  and  spire.  But 
in  the  actual  cathedral  of  St.  Paul  we  shall  find  some  features 
that  may,  in  part,  explain  his  meaning. 

It  is  noticeable  that  the  west  fagade  of  this  design  is  a  close 
copy,  with  modifications  of  proportions  and  minor  details,  of  the 
fa9ade  by  Inigo  Jones  (Fig.  134,  p.  231),  which  the  fire  had  weak- 
ened or  destroyed,  and  which  Wren  had  much  admired.  This 
design  was  approved,  and  the  king's  warrant  for  its  execution  was 
issued  May  ist,  1675.  But  it  is  said  that  "the  king  was  pleased 
to  allow  him  the  liberty  in  the  prosecution  of  his  work,  to  make 
some  variations,  rather  ornamental  than  essential,  as  from  time 
to  time  he  should  see  proper."  ^  The  actual  building  shows 
how  largely  Wren  availed  himself  of  this  liberty. 

1  Parenialia,  p.  283. 


Plate  XI 


DOME   OF   ST.  PAULS 
London 


XIV  THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  239 

The  cathedral  of  St.  Paul  as  it  now  stands  was  never  em- 
bodied in  any  set  of  drawings.  Starting  with  a  few  rough 
sketches  the  scheme  was  developed  as  the  work  proceeded,  the 
master  being  always  present  to  direct  the  work.  Wren  was  at 
the  start  what  would  now  be  called  an  amateur,  but  by  degrees 
he  learned  his  art  in  the  best  possible  way,  not  in  the  office  or 
drawing-room,  but  on  the  scaffold  in  close  contact  with  the 
works.  It  was  thus  that  Brunelleschi  had  worked  on  the  dome 
of  Florence,  and  Michael  Angelo  on  St.  Peter's. 

The  plan  of  the  existing  St.  Paul's  has  no  beauty  compa- 
rable to  that  of  St.  Peter's  (Fig.  31,  p.  6"]^  It  has  a  long  nave 
with  a  short  transept  near  the  middle,  a  semicircular  apse,  and 
two  western  towers.  Both  nave  and  transept  have  side  aisles, 
and  in  the  angles  formed  by  the  towers,  which  project  beyond 
the  aisles  in  the  manner  that  is  common  in  the  mediaeval 
churches  of  England,  are  a  consistory  court  and  a  morning 
chapel,  while  in  the  angles  of  the  crossing  three  vestries  and  a 
stair-turret  are  set.  Thus  the  Greek  cross  plan  which  Wren 
appears  to  have  first  intended,  "  a  long  body  with  aisles  "  having 
been  "  thought  impertinent,  our  religion  not  using  processions," 
was  widely  departed  from  in  conformity  with  the  popular  feel- 
ing that  the  first  plan  "  deviated  too  much  from  the  old  Gothick 
form  of  Cathedral  Churches,  which  they  (the  people)  had  been 
used  to  see  and  admire  in  this  country." 

In  the  elevation  a  great  dome,  in  outline  not  very  unlike  the 
one  first  intended,  rises  over  the  crossing ;  the  nave  and  aisles 
are  vaulted  with  small  domes  on  pendentives  of  peculiar  form, 
and  the  piers  of  the  interior  are  faced  with  a  great  Corinthian 
order  of  pilasters.  That  Wren  worked  with  constant  reference 
to  St.  Peter's  as  the  main  source  of  his  inspiration,  is  clearly 
enough  manifested  in  the  general  scheme,  though  there  are 
many  points  of  difference  between  the  two  monuments,  apart 
from  the  great  difference  of  scale.  Other  sources  of  influence 
are,  however,  also  apparent. 

The  most  interesting  feature  of  St.  Paul's  cathedral  is,  of 
course,  the  great  dome  (Plate  XI),  which  is  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  of  the  series  of  modern  domes  that  began  with  the 
dome  of  Brunelleschi.  In  general  external  form  it  recalls 
Bramante's  diminutive  circular  temple  of  San  Pietro  in  Mon- 
torio,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  Wren  derived  the  idea  from  the 


240 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


woodcut  of  that  design  in  Serlio's  book,  or  in  that  of  Palladio. 
Wren  has,  of  course,  altered  and  amplified  the  scheme  in  adap- 
tation to  his  vast  scale  and  lofty  proportions,  but  the  general 
composition  of  the  two  is  substantially  the  same,  though  the. 
internal  structure  is  entirely  different.  The  leading  features  of 
the  exterior,  the  encircling  order  crowned  with  the  balustrade. 


Fig.  136.  —  Section  of  the  dome  of  St.  Paul's. 


and  the  dome  rising  over  it  surmounted  by  the  lantern,  are  those 
of  Bramante's  design. 

The  structural  system  of  this  dome  (Fig.  136)  is  peculiar. 
From  eight  piers  arches  and  pendentives  are  turned,  form- 
ing the  circular  bed  from  which  the  drum  rises  to  a  great 
height,  and  from  a  level  far  below  the  top  of  this  drum  a 
dome  of  masonry,  of  slightly  oval  form  is  sprung.  The  drum 
is  double,  and  the  inner  wall,  which  carries  the  dome,  in- 
clines inward,  as  in  the  rejected  design,  up  to  the  springing 
level,  and  above  this  it  rises  vertically  against  the  haunch  of 
the   dome.      From   the   haunch  a    hollow  cone  of  masonry  is 


XIV  THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  241 

carried  up  far  above  the  crown  of  the  dome,  where  it  is  cut  off 
and  covered  with  a  small  segmental  dome  surmounted  by  a  tall 
lantern  of  stone.  The  system  is  devised  with  a  view  to  stability. 
The  cone  shape  of  the  inner  drum  gives  it  resistance  to  the 
dome  thrusts,  and  these  thrusts  are  further  fortified  by  a  solid 
filling  of  masonry  between  the  smaller  cone  above  and. the  vault 
reaching  more  than  halfway  from  the  springing  to  the  crown. 
The  outer  drum  is  a  solid  wall  up  to  a  level  but  little  higher 
than  the  apex  of  the  timber  roof  of  the  nave,  where  it  forms  a 
stylobate  for  the  encircling  Corinthian  order.  But  the  two  drums 
are  connected  by  heavy  abutments  across  the  interval  between 
them,  one  behind  each  column  of  the  encircling  order,  with 
a  heavier  buttress  filling  every  fourth  intercolumniation  (Plate 
XI).  The  inner  drum  rises  in  diminished  thickness  above  the 
entablature  of  the  outer  one  in  the  form  of  an  attic  with  an 
order  of  pilasters  and  square  openings  between.  From  this 
attic  rises  a  false  dome  of  timber,  surrounding  and  concealing 
the  great  cone  which  is  the  real  support  of  the  lantern. 

This  remarkable  scheme  embodies  the  last  notable  attempt 
to  solve  the  great  dome  problem  with  which  the  architects  of 
the  Renaissance  had  struggled  from  the  time  of  Brunelleschi. 
But  the  problem  is  incapable  of  a  satisfactory  solution.  It  is 
impossible  to  make  a  large  unbuttressed  dome  stand  securely 
except  by  the  extraneous  means  of  binding  chains.  Wren  has 
not  attempted  to  do  such  a  thing.  He  was  too  good  an 
engineer  to  follow  in  the  footsteps  of  Brunelleschi  and  Michael 
Angelo.  His  dome  is  well  buttressed,  but  it  is  therefore  neces- 
sarily hidden  from  view.  To  raise  another  dome  of  masonry 
from  the  cornice  of  the  drum  for  external  effect,  and  to  crown 
such  a  dome  with  a  stone  lantern  fifty  feet  high,  he  saw  to  be 
impossible  with  safety.  A  semblance  of  such  a  dome  was, 
however,  necessary  to  his  scheme.  He  had  been  charged  to 
make  a  dome  "conspicuous  above  the  houses,"  and  he  therefore 
surrounded  the  cone,  the  true  support  of  the  lantern,  with  a 
wooden  counterfeit  of  a  dome  upon  which  he  makes  the 
beholder  believe  that  the  lantern  rests.  The  system  is  thus  a 
monstrous  architectural  deceit.  We  have  criticised  Michael 
Angelo  for  springing  a  great  dome  from  the  top  of  a  drum,  but 
he  cannot  be  reproached  for  deception.  His  dome  is  a  real 
dome  of  masonry,  and  does  carry  the  lantern  as  it  appears  to. 


242 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


though,  as  we  have  seen,  insecurely,  except  for  so  long  as  the 
binding  chains  can  be  made  to  save  it  from  collapse.  Wren 
would  not  build  a  dome  in  this  inherently  weak  manner.  He 
preferred  to  design  his  masonry  construction  on  sound  prin- 
ciples, which  would  not  allow  an  external  dome,  and  to  enclose 
this  within  the  wooden  counterfeit.  And  it  may  here  be 
remarked  that  most  modern  domes,  modelled  after  St.  Peter's 

and  St.  Paul's,  are 
wooden  construc- 
tions and  carry  lan- 
terns of  wood.  They 
are  thus  entirely 
safe,  but  they  have 
not  the  monumental 
character  of  great 
architectural  works. 
In  general  exter- 
nal effect  the  dome 
of  St.  Paul's  has 
much  merit,  if  it 
does  not  justify  the 
extravagant  remark 
of  Mr.  Loftie  that  it 
is  the  "  noblest  dome 
in  Christendom."  1 

The  proportions 
of  the  interior  of  the 
church  (Plate  XII) 
are  admirable,  and 
give  a  better  effect  of 
scale  than  the  larger 
scheme  of  St. 
Peter's.  But  the 
details  exhibit  more  of  those  aberrations  that  are  inherent  in 
the  architecture  of  the  Renaissance.  The  vaulting  of  the  nave 
(Fig.  137)  is  in  oblong  compartments  with  their  long  axes  run- 
ning transversely,  and  the  small  domes,  which  are  low  spherical 
segments  instead  of  hemispheres,  therefore  leave  considerable 

1  W.  J.  Loftie,  Inigo  Jones  and  Sir  Christopher  Wren,  London,  Macmillan  & 
Co.,  1893,  p.  196, 


Fig.  137.  —  Vaulting  of  St.  Paul's. 


XIV  THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND  243 

intervals  at  each  end  of  each  compartment,  over  which  seg- 
ments of  barrel  vaulting,  of  a  form  generated  by  the  elliptical 
lunettes  of  the  clerestory,  are  turned.  The  pendentives  thus 
have  a  peculiar  shape,  and  are  segments  of  a  hemisphere  cut 
by  four  vertical  planes  coinciding  with  the  sides  of  the  vault 
compartment,  by  a  horizontal  plane  at  the  base  of  the  dome, 
and  by  the  interpenetrating  barrel  vaults.  The  compartments 
are  separated  by  transverse  ribs,  and  these,  together  with  the 
groins  formed  by  the  meeting  of  the  pendentives  and  the 
interpenetrating  lunette  vaults,  give  a  somewhat  mediaeval  effect 
to  the  vaulting  conoid.  In  other  words  the  lines  of  the  groins 
and  the  lunette  arches  form  a  combination  not  unlike  that  of 
Gothic  vaulting.  This  may  have  been  one  of  the  points  in 
which  Wren  fancied  that  he  could  "  reconcile  the  Gothic  to  a 
better  manner." 

In  the  great  order  Wren  has  departed  from  the  scheme  of 
St.  Peter's  in  giving  only  one  pilaster  to  each  pier  of  the  nave, 
though  in  the  larger  piers  under  the  great  dome  he  has  set 
them  in  pairs.  Under  the  archivolts  of  "the  great  arcade  and 
under  the  aisle  vaulting  the  smaller  pilasters  are  coupled,  while 
in  St.  Peter's  they  are  single.  With  the  details  of  these  orders 
the  architect  took  great  liberties  in  utter  disregard  of  the  canons 
of  Vitruvius  and  the  neo-classic  authorities.  The  crowns  of 
the  great  arches  reach  high  above  the  capitals  of  the  pilasters, 
so  that  a  complete  entablature  cannot  pass  over  them.  It  would 
not,  of  course,  do  to  allow  the  archivolts  to  cut  into  an  entabla- 
ture, and  Wren  has  therefore  omitted  the  architrave  and  frieze 
in  the  intervals  of  the  order,  and  has  included  them  only  in  a 
ressaut  over  each  pilaster,  the  cornice  alone  being  carried  over 
the  arch.  To  give  the  vaulting  its  admirable  elevation  with- 
out unduly  magnifying  the  great  order,  as  Michael  Angelo 
did  in  St.  Peter's,  an  attic  is  interposed,  but  to  spring  a  vault 
from  an  attic  wall  is  an  architectural  barbarism  ;  though  it  is 
perhaps  no  greater  one  than  to  spring  it  from  an  entablature, 
as  the  architects  of  the  Renaissance  had  done  from  Brunelleschi 
down.  In  the  small  order  of  the  aisles  the  entablature  is  simpli- 
fied, and  has  only  an  architrave  and  cornice;  while  a  member, 
like  a  diminutive  attic,  in  retreat  of  the  cornice,  is  interposed  at 
the  impost.  It  looks  as  if  this  had  been  done  in  order  to  raise  the 
springing  of  the  arches  so  that  no  part  of  them  would  be  cut 


244 


ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 


CHAP. 


off  from  view  by  the  salience  of  the  cornice ;  and  it  was  appar- 
ently in  part  for  the  same  reason  that  the  attic  was  interposed 
in  the  nave.  The  motive  is  commendable.  The  effect  of  vault- 
ing rising  directly  from  a  salient  cornice  Wren  may  justly  have 
felt  to  be  a  bad  one,  but  to  avoid  it  while  using  classic  details 
necessitates  these  strange  inconsistencies. 

Among  numerous  other  aberrations  of  this  pseudo-classic 
scheme  is  the  treatment  of  the  segmental  archivolts  of  the  small 

half  domes  that  open  out  of  the 
oblique  sides  of  the  great  octagon 
at  the  crossing.  The  orders  of  the 
crossing  piers  have  complete  entab- 
latures (Fig.  138),  and  the  archivolts 
in  question  are  in  two  parts  answer- 
ing to  the  frieze  and  cornice  of 
these  entablatures,  which  they  in- 
tersect in  the  awkward  manner 
shown  in  the  figure.  To  have  mitred 
the  cornice  of  the  archivolt  to  that 
of  the  order  would  have  left  the 
pilaster  beneath  with  an  incomplete 
entablature,  and  the  architect  pre- 
ferred to  run  the  cornice  through 
the  archivolt  in  this  unsightly  way. 
Such  were  some  of  the  further 
makeshifts  to  which  the  designers 
of  the  Renaissance  had  to  resort 
in  their  efforts  to  apply  the  classic 
orders  to  uses  for  which  they  were 
not  adapted.  But  all  such  aberra- 
tions in  the  use  of  classic  elements 
are  superficial  and  open.  A  more 
radical  violation  of  architectural  veracity  is  found  in  the  man- 
ner in  which  the  buttress  system  is  concealed.  The  thrusts  of 
the  nave  vaulting  are  met  by  a  series  of  flying  buttresses  car- 
ried over  the  aisle  roof  in  Gothic  fashion  (Fig.  139).  But  it 
would  not  do  to  have  flying  buttresses  appear  in  an  osten- 
sibly classic  system,  and  Wren  accordingly  hid  them  from  sight 
by  a  screen  wall  made  to  look  like  an  upper  story  in  the  general 
view  of  the  exterior.     It  is  not  until  one  mounts  to  the  terrace  of 


Mr 


Fig.  138.  —  Crossing  pier  and 
impost,  St.  Paul's. 


XIV 


THE  RENAISSANCE  IN  ENGLAND 


245 


the  drum,  and  looking  down  finds  the  space  between  the  clerestory 
and  outer  wall  open  to  the  sky,  that  he  discovers  the  buttresses 
there,  and  realizes  the  deceitful  character  of  the  architectural 
scheme.  Perhaps  this  illustrates  another  point  in  which  Wren 
"  sought  to  reconcile  the  Gothic  to  a  better  manner."  A  similar 
treatment  occurs  in  that  part  of  the  nave  of  St.  Peter's  which 
was  built  by  Maderno. 
Michael  Angelo's  great  ex- 
ternal order  had  obliged 
him,  as  we  saw  (p.  68),  to 
carry  up  the  aisle  wall  to 
the  height  of  the  clerestory, 
but  he  filled  up  the  space 
over  the  aisle  with  his  small 
embedded  dome  (Fig.  32, 
p.  69).  In  Maderno's  part 
the  dome  is  omitted,  and  the 
space  over  the  aisle  vaulting 
is  left  open  to  the  sky  as  in 
St.  Paul's.  But  the  but- 
tresses of  St.  Peter's  are 
solid  cross  walls  with  no  sug- 
gestion of  Gothic  form.  In 
the  vaulting  of  the  apse 
Wren  has  followed  the  quasi- 
mediaeval  form  adopted  by 
Michael  Angelo  in  the  apse 
of  St.  Peter's,  dividing  it  into 
three  shallow  cells  on  con- 
verging ribs  rising  from 
the  stumpy  pilasters  of  the 
attic. 

Of  the  architectural  treatment  of  the  exterior  as  a  whole 
little  need  be  said  further  than  that  it  has  no  relation  to  the  real 
form  of  the  building.  The  masking  of  the  buttress  system  by 
the  false  wall,  and  the  application  of  orders  without  any  struc- 
tural use  or  expression  in  harmony  with  the  real  structure,  are 
entirely  in  keeping  with  the  spirit  the  Renaissance. 

Wren's  other  churches  exhibit  a  medley  of  elements  from 
spurious  Gothic  to  pseudo-classic  in  manifold  irrational  combi- 


FiG.  139. 


•  Half  section  of  the  nave  of 
St.  Paul's. 


246  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE         chap,  xiv 

nations,  such  as  can  be  found  in  the  works  of  few  other  archi- 
tects. These  churches  with  their  vaultings  of  wood  and  plaster 
—  whether  in  the  form  of  domes  on  pendentives,  sprung  from  the 
entablatures  of  classic  orders,  as  at  St.  Stephen's,  Walbrook,  or 
with  Welsh  vaulting  on  simulated  cross  ribs  of  plaster,  as  at 
St.  Bride's,  Fleet  Street,  or  with  barrel  vaulting  on  an  attic,  as 
at  St.  Peter's,  Cornhill,  —  it  would  be  superfluous,  as  well  as 
tiresome,  to  examine  in  detail.  Nor  is  it  worth  while  to  analyze 
the  spires  of  these  churches.  Spires  made  up  of  superimposed 
stories  with  classic  entablatures  in  telescopic  adjustment,  like 
St.  Bride's,  or  temples  of  Vesta  crowned  with  flying  buttresses 
holding  up  neo-classic  tabernacles  surmounted  by  obelisks,  like 
St.  Mary-le-Bow,  are  hybrid  compositions  of  utterly  barbaric 
character,  notwithstanding  the  excellent  portions  for  which 
they  have  been  justly  admired. 


CHAPTER  XV 


CONCLUSION 


I  THINK  it  must  be  clear,  in  the  light  of  the  foregoing  con- 
siderations, that  the  architecture  of  the  Renaissance  is  an  art 
without  consistent  principles.  We  have  seen  that  it  assumed  a 
great  variety  of  phases  at  different  times  and  in  different  locali- 
ties ;  but  that  it  was  never  either  really  classic  or  structurally 
truthful.  While  professing  to  aim  at  restoring  the  "  good  ancient 
manner,"  the  neo-classic  designers  rarely  conformed  to  any  an- 
cient standards  save,  at  most,  in  some  details  of  their  compo- 
sitions. They  designed  for  the  mosc  part,  as  we  have  seen,  on 
a  basis  of  mediaeval  forms,  and  overlaid  their  structures  with  a 
facing  of  details  derived,  indeed,  from  classic  sources,  but  altered, 
mixed,  and  misapplied  in  all  manner  of  unclassic  ways.  Of 
true  classic  art,  i.e.  Greek  art  of  the  best  time  of  Greek  culture, 
they  had,  as  before  remarked  (p.  4),  no  knowledge.  By  the 
"  good  ancient  manner "  they  meant  the  imperial  Roman 
manner.  But  even  this  they  did  not  faithfully  follow.  The 
wide  departure  from  ancient  modes  of  design  so  constantly 
manifested  in  the  neo-classic  architecture  has  not  escaped 
notice  by  modern  writers,  who  are  wont  to  speak  of  it  as  show- 
ing that  the  revivalists  were  not  servile  copyists,  but  inven- 
tive designers  adapting  the  ancient  elements  to  new  conditions. 
But  there  is  no  justification  for  this  view.  As  to  essential  forms 
of  building  there  were  no  new  conditions  to  be  met.  In  seeking 
to  change  architecture  superficially  by  an  application  of  classic 
details  the  neo-classicists  erred.  They  ought  to  have  seen  that 
classic  details  do  not  lend  themselves  to  new  uses.  Their  very 
perfection  for  classic  use  unfits  them  for  any  other.  To  distort 
and  misadjust  them,  as  the  architects  of  the  Renaissance  did,  is 
not  to  adapt  them.  There  was  no  true  adaptation  of  classic 
elements  in  Renaissance  design.  Such  adaptation  involves 
creative   modifications   which    so   transform   original    elements 

247 


248  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE  chap. 

that  to  a  superficial  view  they  are  not  recognizable  in  the  result- 
ing forms.  The  mediaeval  architects,  through  a  long  series  of 
logical  changes,  growing  out  of  their  remarkable  structural 
evolution,  magnificently  transformed  the  classic  orders  in  a 
creative  way.  This  the  neo-classicists  failed  to  perceive,  and 
because  the  mediaeval  details  and  adjustments  did  not  conform 
with  those  of  Roman  antiquity,  they  felt  justified  in  calling 
them  barbaric,  while  it  was  they  themselves  who  were  guilty 
of  architectural  barbarism. 

The  architects  of  the  Renaissance  were  strangely  inconsist- 
ent. While  in  practice  constantly  violating  the  principles  of 
classic  design,  they  were  in  theory  ardently  advocating  these 
principles;  and  finding  strict  canons  of  proportion  laid  down  in 
the  writings  of  Vitruvius,  they  attached,  as  theorists,  great  im- 
portance to  such  canons.  Thus  arose  the  elaborate  systems 
of  rules  for  the  orders  embodied  in  the  writings  of  Vignola, 
Palladio,  and  many  others. 

The  influence  of  these  short-sighted  and  mechanical  Italian 
rules  has  been  great  in  modern  times.  The  formidable  body  of 
architectural  dogma,  contained  in  the  literature  of  the  Renais- 
sance on  this  subject,  has  been  so  widely  accepted  as  authorita- 
tive that  modern  art  has  been  largely  shaped  by  it.  The 
so-called  Palladian  style  of  the  seventeenth  century  was  derived 
mainly  from  the  Italian  books,  and  the  more  recent  teaching 
has  been  so  implicitly  based  on  the  writings  of  Vignola  and 
Palladio  that  few  architects  of  academic  training  have  thought 
of  questioning  the  belief  that  the  formulas  of  these  writers  con- 
stitute the  only  true  basis  of  correct  design.  Yet  the  fact  that 
these  rules  are  arbitrary,  and  not  in  accord  with  the  true  prin- 
ciples of  ancient  art,  has  occasionally  been  recognized.  Thus 
in  a  book  of  the  eighteenth  century,  devoted  in  the  main  to  the 
inculcation  of  the  Palladian  doctrines,^  the  following  remarks 
occur  :  "  As  it  was  from  the  works  of  the  antient  architects 
that  the  several  orders  were  deduced,  those  who  had  studied 
and  found  their  different  characters  then  became  desirous  of 
establishing  from  the  same  source  their  proportions.  .  .  .  Per- 
ceiving consummate  beauty  in  what  they  saw,  they  sought  to 
build  upon  that  perfection  certain  fixed  and  invariable  rules,  by 
the  observing  of  which  others  might  be  sure  of  attaining  the 

^  A  Complete  Body  of  Architecture,  by  Isaac  Ware,  Esq.,  London,  1768. 


XV  CONCLUSION-  249 

same  excellence.  .  .  .  But  when  they  came  to  examine  more 
of  those  works,  they  found  the  antients  had  not  confined  them- 
selves to  any  such  laws ;  and  therefore  that  it  was  impossible 
to  build  such  rules  upon  their  works.  .  .  .  The  young  stu- 
dent is  confused  by  reading  a  variety  of  authors  on  the  sub- 
ject. Among  a  number  of  the  best  of  these  each  delivers  what 
he  esteems  to  be  the  most  true  and  perfect  proportion,  but  in 
each  this  differs.  All  have  founded  their  maxims  upon  some- 
thing in  the  antique,  but,  some  having  taken  in  the  same  order 
one  piece,  and  some  another,  these  proportions  vary  extremely ; 
for  the  antients  so  varied  in  their  works.  Palladio  is  understood 
to  be  the  best  and  greatest  of  these  authors,  we  shall  therefore 
deliver  his  as  the  general  and  received  proportion  in  each  order ; 
but  upon  a  general  review  of  the  several  remains  in  which  that 
order  is  preserved,  we  shall  add  what  is  the  mean  or  middle  pro- 
portion of  the  several  parts,  calculating  from  them  all.  The 
modern  architects  too  strictly  and  scrupulously  follow  these 
antients  ;  they  did  not  so  closely  or  servilely  copy  one  another."  ^ 
Such  recognition  of  the  difference  between  the  theorists'  rules  of 
the  orders  and  the  ancient  orders  themselves  is  rare  in  the  modern 
literature  of  architecture.  But  the  remedy  proposed  to  relieve 
the  student  from  the  confusion  arising  from  the  perusal  of  dif- 
ferent authors  each  of  whom  "  delivers  what  he  esteems  to  be 
the  most  true  and  perfect  proportion "  is  of  little  efificacy  in 
practice ;  for  the  mean  or  middle  proportion  would  still  impose 
a  fixed  rule,  and  the  true  artist  does  not  work  by  rules  of  any 
sort.  The  proportions  of  a  genuine  work  of  art  are  determined 
by  a  sense  of  proportion  that  is  governed  by  laws  too  fine  to 
be  formulated,  and  which  no  rules  can  reach.  It  is  his  natural 
sense  of  proportion,  developed  by  observation  and  exercise, 
that  more  than  anything  else  makes  an  artist.  Prescription  may 
serve  in  mechanical  processes,  but  not  in  the  production  of  works 
of  art.  We  may  get  Palladian  formalism  by  rules,  but  no  archi- 
tecture of  vital  character.  A  system  of  proportions  that  may 
be  good  in  one  case  cannot  be  good  in  any  other,  and  therefore 
it  is  that  "the  antients  "  so  varied  in  their  works.  That  rules  are 
useless  to  an  artist  the  Italian  writer  Baldinucci,  in  his  book  on  the 
proportions  of  the  human  figure,^  has  well  remarked.     He  says 

1  op.  cit.,  p.  131. 

2  Lettera  di  Filippo  Baldinucci  intonto  al  niodo  di  dar  Proporzione  alle  Figure 
in  Fittura  e  Scultura,  Leghorn,  first  published  in  1 802. 


250  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE      chap,  xv 

on  this  point  :  "  It  is  true  that  all  these  proportions,  whether  in 
painting  or  in  sculpture,  must  be  subject  to  the  correction  of  the 
eye,  so  that  proportions  ought  to  be  adopted  always  with  its 
approval,  notwithstanding  all  fixed  rules,  seeing  that  this  has 
been  the  custom  of  all  the  best  artists,  confirmed  by  the  memo- 
rable saying  of  the  great  Buonarroti  that  it  is  necessary  for  the 
master  to  have  the  compass  in  his  eye."  ^ 

In  the  light  of  what  we  have  seen  I  think  it  must  appear 
that  the  claims  which  have  been  advanced  for  the  architecture 
of  the  Renaissance  as  the  only  architecture  of  correct  principles 
since  that  of  classic  antiquity,  and  as  an  architecture  in  compari- 
son with  which  the  Gothic  art  of  the  Middle  Ages  should  be  con- 
sidered as  the  barbarous  product  of  an  unenlightened  age,  are 
without  justification.  The  mistaken  notions  of  the  Italian 
writers  of  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  (labouring  under 
strange  misapprehension  of  the  principles  of  classic  art  on  the 
one  hand,  and  ignorance  of  the  true  Gothic  on  the  other)  have 
been  too  much  inculcated  in  our  own  time ;  and  the  belief  that 
classic  art  offers  suitable  models  for  modern  uses,  and  that  the 
architecture  of  the  Renaissance  embodies  classic  principles,  has 
been  accepted  with  too  little  examination  of  its  grounds.  A  few 
of  the  most  competent  modern  authors,  while  in  the  main  dis- 
posed, by  force  of  custom,  to  take  a  favourable  view  of  the 
architecture  of  the  Renaissance,  have  occasionally  shown  a 
juster  sense  of  its  real  character.  Thus  the  recent  Italian 
writer  Melani  says  r^  "We  always  admire  the  beautiful  pro- 
ductions of  the  art  of  the  Renaissance,  because  we  are  accus- 
tomed to  value  the  good  wherever  it  is  found ;  but  when  we 
think  of  the  absurdity  of  this  art,  and  still  worse,  of  the  con- 
sequences to  which  it  has  given  rise,  we  cannot  but  deplore  so 
much  ill-directed  energy." 

1  op.  cii.,  p.  lOo  *  Architettura  Italiana,  Milan,  1887,  vol.  2,  p.  140. 


APPENDIX 

CONDITION   OF  THE   DOME   OF   ST.   PETER'S 

The  mathematicians,  after  describing  the  dome  and  its  supports,  make 
the  following  statement  of  the  condition  in  which  they  found  it :  ^  — 

1.  La  base  esteriore  A  del  tamburo  si  vede  piena  di  spaccature, 
molte  delle  quali  corrono  unite  in  su  per  tutto  il  tamburo  medesimo,  e 
per  tutto  r  attico,  fino  a  nascondersi  in  nd  sotto  i  piombi  non  ancora 
scoperti.  Da  dette  spaccature  si  diramano  continui  peli,  che  infrangono 
una  quantita  grandissima  di  travertini. 

2.  Esse  spaccature  al  fondo  son  piccolissime,  e  in  su  van  sempre 
crescendo.     Piegano  dagli  arconi  in  giu  verso  i  piloni. 

3.  Nel  Corridore  CB,  che  gira  dentro  tutta  la  base  si  vedono  sul  muro 
esteriore  BE  molte  aperture,  che  parimente  venendo  in  giu  piegano 
verso  i  piloni. 

4.  Nello  stesso  muro  esteriore  pure  dentro  il  corridore  si  vedono 
raddoppiate  aperture  orizontali  verso  il  fondo  B,  che  nell'  alzarsi  il 
pavimento  sopra  gli  arconi,  si  seppelliscono  sotto  al  medesimo,  veden- 
dosi  ivi  piu  che  altrove  lo  stesso  pavimento  separato  dal  muro  esteriore ; 
qual  disunione  e  generale  per  tutto  il  corridore. 

5.  Dette  aperture  orizontali  passano  tutta  la  grossezza  BA  del  muro 
esteriore  della  base,  come  si  vede  nelle  porte,  che  metton  fuora,  rialzan- 
dosi  tutto  il  muro  dalla  parte  interiore  verso  B,  e  rimanendo  1'  appoggio 
solamente  verso  A ;  anzi  verso  B  tra  una  spaccatura  orizontale  e  1'  altra 
in  qualche  luogo  si  levano  coUe  mani  senza  sforzo  considerable  i  mattoni 
non  piu  premuti. 

6.  Delle  spaccature  vertical!  se  ne  vede  una  sola  nel  muro  interiore  C. 

7.  La  volta  E  del  medesimo  corridore  h  tutta  spaccata  in  mezzo  con 
una  generale  apertura,  che  gira  attorno  da  per  tutto. 

8.  Essa  apertura  passa  tutta  la  grossezza  EF  della  volta,  vedendosi 
generalmente  nel  mattonato  F  sotto  gli  archetti  de'  contraforti,  e  per  tutto 
attorno  il  ripiano,  per  cui  si  gira  il  tamburo  ;  e  perche  vi  pioveva  giu  nel 
corridore,  detto  mattonato  fu  rassettato  non  h.  un'  anno. 

9.  Nel  luogo  di  tal  rassetto  si  vedono  nuovi  distacchi  de'  mattoni 
rimessi ;  anzi  in  qualche  sito  si  vedono  rotti  i  mattoni  nuovi  sopra  1'  aper- 
tura antica,  e  in  qualche  luogo  di  nuovo  piove  giu  nel  corridore. 

^  The  letters  in  this  description  refer  to  those  of  the  illustration  (Fig.  30)  in  the 
text. 

251 


252  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 

10.  I  sedici  contraforti  FG  si  vadon  rotti  con  moltissime  aperture, 
che  nel  salire  piegano  in  dentro ;  le  medesime  rompono  per  mezzo  gran 
numero  di  travertini  di  essi  contraforti  e  quelli  del  cornicione  m. 

11.  Sopra  r  archetto  F  sono  assai  piu  tenui,  e  nell'  andare  in  su 
crescono  notabilmente. 

12.  Molte  di  queste  aperture,  si  vede,  che  sono  state  stuccate,  essen- 
dosi  poi  riaperte  le  stuccature,  e  dilatate,  e  molte  altre  vi  sono,  dove  non 
vi  e  vestigio  di  stuccatura. 

13.  In  due  archetti  verso  la  cima  de'  muri  dritti  F,  che  li  sostengono, 
si  vede  la  parte  superiore  venuta  in  fuora  notabilmente,  e  in  un  di  essi  in 
modo  particolare  il  muro  FG  distaccato  nella  cantonata  piu  sensibil- 
mente  dal  tamburo.  Simil  moto  orizontale  di  alcuna  parte  venuta  un 
poco  piu  in  fuora,  si  vede  anche  nel  muro  esteriore  A  della  base. 

14.  Gli  architravi  r  delle  sedici  finestre  son  rotti  tutti  a  riserva  di  uno, 
o  due,  ma  dove  e  intero  1'  architrave,  e  rotto  uno  stipite.  In  tutte  poi 
son  rotte  le  cornici  sopra  1'  architrave,  e  i  travertini  de'  muri  sopra,  e 
sotto  le  finestre,  e  a  lato  verso  i  contraforti  hanno  moltissime  aperture, 
e  peli,  che  li  infrangono. 

15.  In  uno  stipite  di  finestra  a  e  degna  di  considerazione  un'  apertura 
verticale,  che  cominciando  al  basso  nella  faccia  voltata  all'  altro  stipite, 
piega  un  poco  in  dentro. 

16.  Tutte  le  scale  a  lumaca,  per  cui  si  sale  dentro  al  tamburo,  sono 
affatto  dissetate,  vedendosi  rotti  e  distaccati  gli  scalini.  In  una  di  queste, 
per  cui  si  sale  ordinariamente  ben  rassettata,  si  vedono  molti  stangoni  di 
ferro,  e  paletti,  che  reggono  gli  scalini  rotti. 

17.  Entrando  fra  le  due  Cupole  per  il  corridoretto  K,  si  vedono  delle 
aperture  verticale  negli  spicchi  fra'  muri  T  de'  costoloni,  e  si  seppelli- 
scono  sotto  K,  dove  le  due  Cupole  son  unite ;  le  medesime  anche  rompono 
gli  architravi  e  soglie  delle  porte  e  finestre.  Lo  spicchio  che  corrisponde 
sopra  il  pilone  della  Veronica,  principalmente  verso  il  mezzo  delle  scale 
T,  e  dissestato  molto.  Di  tali  aperture  ci  vien  detto  da  chi  le  ha  contate 
tutte  con  diligenza,  trovarsene  37  nella  Cupola  esteriore,  39  nell' 
interiore. 

18.  Sotto  il  Cupolino  nel  corridoretto  O  si  vedono  rotte  le  faccie  de' 
muri  de'  costoloni,  seguitando  per  essi  muri  le  spaccature  orizontali  OP, 
dove  piu  alte,  dove  piu  basse,  e  continuando  in  alcun  luogo  fra  lo  spicchio 
della  Cupola  esteriore  e  il  muro  del  costolone. 

19.  Pure  nella  volticella  di  esso  corridore  si  vedono  delle  aperture, 
che  passano  verso  u  sotto  gli  archetti  de'  contraforti  del  Cupolino,  e  in 
alcune  delle  finestre  del  collo  della  Cupola  si  vedono  rotti  gli  architravi, 
con  degli  altri  movimenti  nel  muro  interiore. 

20.  I  medesimi  contraforti  in  Q  hanno  molte  aperture,  che  terminano 
verso  il  mezzo  delle  finestre. 


APPENDIX 


253 


21.  Tutti  i  pilastrini  di  dentro  tra  le  finestre  in  R  a  mezza  altezza  in 
circa  si  vedono  rotti,  e  alcuni  in  due  luoghi  orizontalmente,  restando  con 
detta  generale  apertura  tutto  il  Cupolino  diviso  orizontalmente  per  mezzo. 

22.  Passando  ora  alia  parte  interiore  della  Cupola,  in  tutti  i  sedici 
spicchi  si  vedono  de'  peli,  o  delle  aperture  verso  S  nelle  cornici  tonde 
de'  Serafini  di  mosaico  e  nelle  bislunghe  degli  Angeli,  molte  delle  quali 
aprono  considerabilmente  i  mosaici  stessi. 

23.  Nello  spicchio  sopra  il  pilone  della  Veronica  si  vede  una  grandis- 
sima  apertura  S^YZ.  Essa  passa  sotto  il  cornicione  Z  nel  fregio,  dove  h 
assai  tenue ;  va  sempre  dilatandosi  fino  all'  impostatura  della  Cupola  in 
q,  indi  di  nuovo  si  ristringe  morendo  in  cima  sotto  il  Cupolino  stesso. 
Sopra  il  pilone  del  Longino,  che  resta  in  faccia,  vi  h  un'  altra  simile 
spaccatura  assai  sensibile,  anche  a  guardarla  giu  dalla  Chiesa.  Sopra  gli 
altri  due  piloni  pure,  benche  alquanto  minore  e  tale,  che  dalla  Chiesa  vi 
passa  un  vento  assai  gagliardo,  e  in  varj  altri  spicchi  pur  sene  vedono. 
Dette  aperture  dividono,  e  distaccano  le  figure  de'  mosaici,  fino  a  fame 
cader  qualche  pezzo. 

24.  Gli  architravi  di  quasi  tutte  le  finestre  in  X  sono  rotti. 

25.  Ne'  Pilastri  del  tamburo  si  vedono  delle  aperture  orizontali,  in  by 
per  cui  s'  aprono  le  commessure  de'  travertini  de'  quali  sono  incrostati. 

26.  Ne'  mosaici  sopra  il  cornicione  Z  si  vedono  alcuni  leggieri  peli 
orizontali,  benche  non  troppo  sensibili. 

27.  I  due  arconi  attorno  al  pilone  della  Veronica  anno  suUa  cima  in 
mezzo  un  leggier  pelo,  senza  pero  che  si  discosti  una  parte  dall'  altra,  o 
r  una  scenda  sotto  1'  altra ;  e  sotto  il  cornicione  tra  1'  arco  de'  SS. 
Simone  e  Giuda,  e  il  pilone  della  Veronica  scende  un  pelo,  che  muore 
assai  prima  di  giungere  all'  arco.  Detto  pelo  si  vede  dalla  parte  di  fiiori 
sopra  la  volta  della  Chiesa  nel  muro  del  tamburo  inalzato  sull'  arco 
stesso,  e  parimente  i  peli  de'  due  arconi  nella  parte  superiore  de' 
medesimi  si  riscontrano,  ma  tenuissimi. 

28.  In  varj  luoghi  tanto  di  fiiora,  quanto  fra  le  due  Cupole  si  vedon 
rotti,  o  distaccati  alcuni  pezzi  di  marmo  a  coda  di  rondine  messi  in 
questi  ultimi  anni  attroverso  alle  spaccature  per  vedere  se  la  fabrica 
faceva  moto. 

29.  I  paletti  de'  cerchi  L  che  cingono  la  Cupola  interiore,  si  vedono 
in  alcuni  luoghi  rimossi  dal  sito  verticale  per  piu  once. 

30.  Di  fuora  nell'  ordin'  Attico  da  in  fino  ad  n  si  vedono  in  piu  siti 
delle  aperture  orizontali  nelle  commessure  de'  travertini  rialzati  un  tantino^ 
e  un  simil  moto  si  riscontra  in  alcuni  stipiti  delle  finestre  esteriori  nel 
corridoretto  K,  che  gira  tra  le  due  Cupole. 

31.  Questo  e  cio,  che  abbiamo  veduto  cogli  occhi  nostri.  Di  piu  fatti 
esaminare  i  pilastri  b  col  piombino  si  e  trovato,  che  sbilanciano  in  fiiora, 
altri  tr^  once,  altri  due  e  mezza,  ed  altri  meno,  e  altrettanto  in  circa 


254  ARCHITECTURE  OF  THE  RENAISSANCE 

sbilanciano  pur'  in  fuora  i  pilastri  de'  contraforti  G,  che  stanno  attaccati 
al  tamburo.  Ma  de'  pilastri  esteriori  de'  medesimi  contraforti  alcuni 
sbilanciano  un  tantino  in  dentro,  altri  stanno  a  un  di  presso  a  piombp. 

32.  La  gran  spaccatura  sopra  il  pilone  della  Veronica  sul  cornicioncino 
deir  Attico  in  h  h.  di  quattro  once,  e  vene  sono  due  vicinissime,  in  cui 
essa  diramasi  di  un*  oncia  e  mezza  fra  tutte  due.  Quella  in  faccia  sopra 
il  Longino  h  di  due  once  e  mezza.  Ivi  le  spaccature  in  giro  sono  in 
numero  27,  e  tanto  grosse,  che  messe  insieme  si  trovano  di  22  once,  e 
poco  piu  su  di  24. 


INDEX 


Aachen,  dome,  ii  (cut). 

Abutments,  lack  of,  in  the  dome  of  Florence 
cathedral,  22,  23 ;  of  dome  of  St.  Peter's, 
50  (cut),  S3. 

Agnolo,  Baccio  d',  his  work  on  the  Palazzo 
Bartolini,  Florence,  109;  his  innovation 
in  framing  window  openings,  109,  116. 

Aisles,  treatment  of  facade  over  the,  in  ch. 
of  Santa  Maria  Novella,  Florence,  37 ;  in 
ch.  of  Sant'  Agostino,  Rome,  74. 

Alberti,  Leon  Batista,  said  by  Milizia  to  be 
regarded  as  one  of  the  principal  restorers 
of  the  architecture  of  antiquity,  35;  his 
use  of  the  Roman  triumphal-arch  design 
as  a  model  for  his  fagades,  38,  39-43 
(cuts) ;  applied  himself  to  writing  on, 
rather  than  practising  architecture,  107, 
108;  his  influence  seen  in  Bramante's 
works,  112;  ch.  of  Santa  Maria  Novella, 
Florence,  35,  41,  42;  ch.  of  Sant"  Andrea 
of  Mantua,  38-42  (cut  and  plate),  53;  Pal- 
azzo Rucellai,  Florence,  107,  108  (cut). 

Angelo,  Michael,  90;  design  for  the  tomb  of 
Pope  Julius  II.,  46;  his  work  on  St. 
Peter's,  53-65  (cuts),  237;  date  of  his 
appointment  as  architect  of  St.  Peter's, 
53 ;  his  alterations  of  Bramante's  plan, 
53,  70;  his  admiration  for  the  dome  of 
Florence  cathedral,  55;  quoted  on  the 
Pantheon  dome,  55;  defects  in  his  scheme, 
63,  64;  his  makeshifts,  66;  windows  of 
Palazzo  Farnese,  Rome,  116,  117  (cut). 

Angle,  Roman  treatment  of  the,  79  (cut)  ; 
pilasters  on  the,  78-81  (cut) . 

Arabesque,  Renaissance  in  imitation  of 
Roman,  167  (cuts). 

Arcades,  of  the  court  of  Palazzo  Farnese,  use 
of  Roman  combination  of  arch  and  en- 
tablature, 118;  cloister  of  Santa  Maria 
della  Pace,  Rome,  119;  chateau  of 
La  Rochefoucauld,  France,  Flamboyant 
arches  framed  with  pilasters,  188. 

Arch,  the  radical  nature  of  the  change 
wrought  in  architecture  by  the  introduc- 
tion of,  was  never  grasped  by  the  im- 
perial Roman  designers,  37 ;  the  Roman 
triumphal,  used  as  a  model  of  Renais- 
sance facades,  38,  39-43  (cuts) ;  the 
Roman  arch  and  entablature  scheme  ap- 
plied to  a  continuous  arcade,  118, 119;  of 
FlamBoyant  depressed  or  three-centred 
form,  184,  188. 


Architectural  carving  of  the  Renaissance,  167- 
178  (cuts).    .S'^^  Carving,  Architectural. 

Architectural  shams,  use  of,  in  the  Renais- 
sance, 32,  121,  132. 

Architecture,  the  communal  and  individual 
spirit  in,  4,  5;  its  division  into  three  dis- 
tinctive styles  and  two  classes,  6, 7 ;  proper 
meaning  of  the  term,  152;  structural  in- 
tegrity a  fundamental  prerequisite  of 
good,  24;  use  of  structural  members 
without  structural  meaning  violates  the 
true  principles  of  architectural  design, 
68 ;  mechanical  rules  cannot  reach  the  law 
of  the  proportions  of  a  genuine  work  of 
art,  133,  207,  249 ;  conscious  effort  to  be 
original  in,  is  inevitably  disastrous,  206; 
the  noblest,  has  always  been  mainly  a 
social,  communal,  and  national,  not  a  per- 
sonal product,  206. 

Arezzo,  church  of  Santissima  Annunziatta, 
83;  nave,  83  (cut). 

Arnolfo,  his  design  for  the  dome  of  Florence 
cathedral,  13  (cut),  16. 

Artificial  elements  in  architectural  ornamen- 
tation, use  of,  172. 

Assisi,  church  of  Santa  Maria  degli  Angeli, 
89;  date,  89;  general  plan,  89;  chapels, 
90;  orders,  90  (cut);  piers,  90  (cut); 
ressauts,  90;  influence  of  St.  Peter's  in, 
90;  fa9ade,  90. 

Athens,  the  Propylaea,  spacing  of  the  col- 
umns of  the  order,  113;  National  Mu- 
seum, leafage  of  capital  from  Epidaurus, 
174  (cut). 

Attic  wall,  use  in  an  interior  as  a  support  for 
vaulting,  151,  243;  of  the  facade  of  the 
chapel  of  the  Pazzi,  Florence,  31 ;  of 
Michael  Angelo's  dome  of  St.  Peter's, 
Rome,  54, 

Baalbek,  Pantheon  of,  292 ;  entablature,  292 ; 
breaking  of  the  pediment,  94,  95  (cut), 
1 17 ;  ressauts,  95. 

Baccio  d'  Agnolo,  architect  of  tower  of  Santo 
Spirito,  Florence,  82. 

Balconies,  with  balustrades,  160. 

Baldinucci,  Lettera  di  Filippo  Baldinucci 
Intorno  al  modo  di  dar  Proporzione  alle 
Figure,  etc.,  249* ;  quoted  on  rules  of  pro- 
portion in  art,  250. 

Barley,  ear  of,  in  Renaissance  and  in  Greek 
carving  compared,  169  (plate  and  cut). 


25s 


256 


INDEX 


Barrozzi,  Giacomo.    See  Vignola. 

Beltrami,  Luca,  //  Pantheon,  89I. 

Benedict  XIV,  Pope,  his  inquiries  as  to  the 

safety  of  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's,  60. 
Bernini,  Wren's  meeting  with  him  at  Paris, 

233- 

Berty,  Adolphe,  Les  Grands  Architectes  Fran- 
(ais  de  la  Renaissance,  194I,  200^ ;  quoted 
on  Lescot,  194,  196I;  quoted  on  De 
rOrme,  200I. 

Bettini,  Giovanni,  his  work  on  the  church  of 
Santa  Maria  Novella,  Florence,  35. 

Blind  arcade,  forms  proper  decoration  for 
mediaeval  interiors,  29. 

Bloomfield,  Reginald,  A  History  of  Renais- 
sance Architecture  in  England,  218,  232^; 
quoted  on  Inigo  Jones,  232. 

Bologna,  Palazzo  Bevilacqua,  165 ;  window 
openings  of  mediaeval  form  without  cen- 
tral shaft,  165. 

Bourges,  house  of  Jacques  Coeur,  a  fore- 
runner of  the  Renaissance  chiteaux, 
180. 

Bramante,  his  birth  and  early  work,  44;  the 
Tempietto  of  San  Pietro  in  Montorio, 
44-46  (cut) ,  239 ;  his  work  on  St.  Peter's, 
Rome,  47-53  (cuts),  63,  64,  70,  236; 
his  use  of  the  Pantheon  and  Basilica 
of  Maxentius  as  models,  49-52  (cuts) ; 
alteration  of  his  scheme  by  others,  49^, 
53-55,  64,  70;  weakness  of  his  scheme, 
52;  accused  of  poor  workmanship,  64; 
ch.  of  Santa  Maria  della  Consolazione  at 
Todi,  74-77  (cuts)  ;  his  work  on  the 
cathedral  of  Como,  144;  ch.  of  Santa 
Maria  delle  Grazie,  Milan,  140,  142;  ch. 
of  San  Satiro,  Milan,  138  (cut) ;  cloister 
of  Santa  Maria  della  Pace,  Rome,  119; 
Palazzo  Cancelleria,  Rome,  112-114 
(cut). 

Brescia,  Palazzo  Comunale,  163,  of  the 
broletto  type,  163,  window  openings,  164 ; 
Palazzo  Martinengo,  peculiar  and  mean- 
ingless style  of  window  opening,  166 
(cut) ;  Palazzo  Municipale,  leafage  of  cap- 
itals, 176  (cut). 

Brunelleschi,  the  dome  of  Florence  cathedral, 
10-25, 22, 48, 50, 54, 55 ;  his  own  account  of 
the  dome  quoted,  18I,  22I ;  his  great  ability, 
21;  his  scaffolding,  2i3 ;  why  he  led  the 
way  in  a  wrong  direction,  22,  25,  63; 
character  of  his  work  in  general,  26 ;  his 
use  of  the  orders,  26 ;  the  chapel  of  the 
Pazzi,  Florence,  26-32  (cuts),  175;  ch.  of 
San  Lorenzo,  Florence,  33;  ch.  of  Santo 
Spirito,  Florence,  33;  the  Pitti  palace, 
Florence,  106;  Palazzo  Pazzi  or  the  Qua- 
ratesi,  Florence,  106;  leafage  of  capital, 
17s  (cut). 

Bullant,  Reigle  Generalle  de  Architecture, 
192I ;  his  reproduction  of  the  order  of  a 


Roman  temple  in  the  portico  of  the 
chiteau  of  Ecouen,  192. 

Buttresses,  in  support  of  domes,  10,  53;  of 
St.  Peter's,  Rome,  53  (cut),  55,  56,  59;  of 
a  circular  Gothic  vault,  57I ;  conceal- 
ing of,  in  St.  Paul's,  London,  244,  245 
(cut). 

Byzantine  architecture,  6,  7;  term  loosely 
applied,  29' ;  the  dome  on  pendentives 
is  the  distinguishing  structural  feature  of, 
29I ;  their  domes  were  properly  con- 
structed, 63;  scheme  prevails  in  Renais- 
sance architecture,  74. 

Caen,  church  of  St.  Pierre,  exterior  of  apse 
with  Lombard  Renaissance  details  applied 
to  a  Flamboyant  structural  scheme,  214. 
Cambridge,  England,  Caius  College,  gate  of 

honor,  neo-classic  features,  223. 
Carving,  architectural,  of  the  Renaissance, 
167-178  (cuts)  : 
Sculpture  of  the  human  figure  on  Renais- 
sance buildings  has  little  proper  archi- 
tectural character,  167. 
Relief  carving,  167-178  (cuts)  ;  pictorial 
treatment  of,  158;  a  great  deal  is  in 
close  imitation  of  Roman  models,  167 
(cut),  171,  172;  the  best  is  superior  to 
that  of  ancient  Rome,  168,  170,  176; 
conventionalization  of  forms,  169  (plate 
and  cut) ;  formal  convolutions  of,  170, 
171 ;  the  finish,  in  many  cases,  mere 
surface  smoothing,  170,  171 ;  two 
schemes  which  are  used  with  wearisome 
repetition,  171 ;  arrangement  of  compo- 
sition and  treatment  of  details  often 
artificial  and  inorganic,  172  (cut),  173, 
(cuts)  ;  the  finest  forms  those  of  folia- 
tion, 170,  174;  leafage  of  capitals,  175- 
178  (cuts)  ;  artificial  convention  of  the 
ridges  which  mark  the  subdivisions  of 
the  leaf  surface,  176  (cuts) ;  the  gro- 
tesque is  uniformly  weak  and  character- 
less, 176-178  (cuts)  ;  Putti  are  without 
particular  merit  as  design,  178. 
Casati,  /  Capi  d'  Arte  di  Bramante  da  Urbino 

nel  Milanese,  138I,  142I. 
Cecchini,  Opinione  Intorno  lo  Stato  dellagran 
Cupola  del  Duomo  di  Firenze,  24I ;  cited 
on  the  stability  of  the  dome  of  Florence 
cathedral,  238,  24I. 
Celled  vault,  a  Gothic  circular,  20,  21 ;  nature 

of  its  construction,  56-59  (cuts). 
Chains,  binding,  12,  22,  74;  of  the  dome  of 
Florence  cathedral,  19,  24I ;  of  St.  Peter's, 
Rome,  59,  60. 
Chambers,    Sir    William,     Treatise   on    the 
Decorative  Part  of   Civil  Architecture, 

134^- 
Chimney-stacks  in  shape  of  Doric  columns 
in  Elizabethan  houses,  217  (cut),  223. 


INDEX 


2S7 


Church,  the,  in  Middle  Ages  and  Renais- 
sance period,  1-3. 

Church  architecture,  of  the  Florentine  Re- 
naissance, 26-43  (cuts) ;  of  the  Roman 
Renaissance,  66-101  (cuts) ;  of  the  Re- 
naissance in  North  Italy,  135-153. 

Clamps,  metal,  used  in  masonry,  22^ ;  of  St. 
Peter's  dome,  60. 

Classic  inspiration  in  the  Renaissance,  4,  97, 
119. 

Classic  models,  the  classic  style  which  was 
followed  in  the  Renaissance  was  that  of 
the  decadent  Greek  schools  as  repre- 
sented in  Roman  copies,  4,  247 ;  misuse 
of,  33,  84. 

Claudian  aqueduct,  106. 

Coffering,  Roman,  in  interior  of  church  of 
Sant"  Andrea  of  Mantua,  39. 

Colonnade  of  Bramante's  scheme  for  St. 
Peter's  dome,  51,  56. 

Columns,  small,  free-standing,  placed  by  San- 
sovino  on  each  side  of  the  pier  to  bear 
the  archivolt,  123,  130,  often  spoken  of  as 
an  innovation  of  Sansovino  and  Paliadio, 
but  instances  of  it  occur  in  Graeco-Roman 
architecture  of  Syria,  131  (cut) ;  peculiar 
form  of,  claimed  by  De  I'Orme  as  his  own 
invention,  201-206  (cut),  practically  the 
same  column  occurs  in  Serlio's  book, 
203  (cut),  an  ancient  adumbration  of 
this  form  occurs  in  the  Porta  Maggiore, 
Rome,  205,  other  Italian  examples  of 
the  same  column,  205,  206,  mention  of 
its  use  in  England,  221,  222,  229;  notion 
that  the  Ionic  order  was  designed  after 
female  proportions,  207. 

Communal  spirit  of  the  Middle  Ages,  4,  5. 

Como,  cathedral,  144-149  (cuts)  ;  description 
of  exterior,  144;  details  are  mediaeval  Lom- 
bard modified  by  neo-classic  elements, 
144;  portals,  illogical  use  of  arch  and 
entablature  in,  144,  145  (cuts),  149;  win- 
dow openings,  variety  of  illogical  forms 
in,  148  (cut)  ;  tapering  jamb  shafts,  149. 

Consoles,  reversed  over  the  aisle  compart- 
ments of  an  exterior,  37,  74,  95. 

Constantinople,  Hagia  Theotokos,  dome, 
10  (cut)  ;  church  of  St.  Sophia,  dome 
mentioned,  10. 

Conventionalization  of  forms  in  relief  carving 

of  the  Renaissance,  168  (cut). 
Corinthian  capitals,  84. 

Corner  pilasters,  78-81  (cut). 

Cornice,  of  St.    Peter's,   Rome,  dwarfs   the 
effect   of  altitude,   68,  92;   breaking  of, 
93-95  (cut). 
Cosimo  de'  Medici,  103,  no. 
Court,   circular,  of  Vignola,  influences  De 
I'Orme  and  Jones  in  building  the  courts 
of  the  Tuileries  and  Whitehall,  130,  131. 
Cunningham,  The  Lives  of  the  Most  Eminent 

S 


British  Painters,  Sculptors,  and  Archi- 
tects, 217'^,  226  ff. ;  quoted  on  the  unsub- 
stantial structures  of  the  Renaissance  in 
England,  217. 

De  rOrme,  Philibert,  Le  Premier  Tome  de 
V Architecture,  206^  If.,  209;  a  man  with 
little  artistic  genius,  200,  209 ;  overesti- 
mated by  Viollet  le  Due,  200I,  207<*; 
Adolphe  Berty  on,  200I ;  studied  the 
antique  in  Rome,  200;  his  work  on  the 
Tuileries,  200-207  (cut) ;  peculiar  form  of 
column  claimed  by  him  as  his  own  inven- 
tion, 201-206  (cut)  ;  his  doorway,  with 
use  of  the  peculiar  column,  203  (cut) ; 
description  of  doorway  quoted  from  his 
book,  209  (cut). 

Delaborde,  Viscount,  quoted,  7^.- 

Della  Porta,  73 ;  fa9ade  of  ch.  of  the  Gesfi, 
Rome,  95  (cut). 

Dolcebono,  architect.  Church  of  Monastero 
Maggiore,  Milan,  142,  143. 

Domes,  construction  of  early,  10-15;  hid- 
den externally  by  drum  and  timber 
roof,  10,  II  (cut) ;  Byzantine,  on  penden- 
tives,  10  (cut),  29I;  polygonal,  12,  243; 
pointed  in  outline,  12,  14,  16,  52;  octago- 
nal, 13,  14,  16;  hemispherical,  248,  52; 
Arabian,  12I;  binding  chains,  12,  241; 
the  thrust,  15I,  24,  52;  why  a  dome  can- 
not have  the  character  of  a  Gothic  vault, 
20,  21,  56-59  (cuts) ;  proper  mode  of  con- 
structing, settled  by  the  ancient  Romans 
and  Byzantines,  63 ;  attempt  of  the  archi- 
tects of  the  Renaissance  to  solve  the  great 
dome  problem,  241,  242;  most  modern 
domes  modelled  after  St.  Peter's  and  St. 
Paul's  are  wooden  constructions,  242 ;  of 
Hagia  Theotokos,  Constantinople,  10 
(cut)  ;  of  Florence  cathedral,  10-25,  65, 
design  of  Arnolfo,  13,  modelled  on  dome 
of  Baptistery,  16,  details  of  construction, 
16-20,  magnitude  of  the  work,  21, 
stability  of,  23;  of  Florence  Baptistery, 
details  of  construction,  14  (cut),  dome  of 
Florence  cathedral  derived  from,  16,  20; 
vault  of  the  chapel  of  the  Pazzi,  Florence, 
not  a  dome,  27  (cut),  28,  56;  ch.  of  San 
Lorenzo,  Florence,  34;  vault  of  ch.  of 
Santo  Spirito,  P'lorence,  34;  St.  Paul's, 
London,  rejected  scheme,  235  (cut),  like- 
ness to  Bramante's  scheme  for  St.  Peter's, 
Rome,  236  (cut),  likeness  to  Michael 
Angelo's  scheme,  237,  present  structure, 
239  (plate),  recalls  Bramante's  San  Pie- 
tro  in  Montorio,  Rome,  239,  structural 
system  of,  239-242  (cut) ;  ch.  of  Santa 
Maria  delle  Grazie,  Milan,  140  (cut) ; 
vault  of  the  chapel  of  St.  Peter  Martyr, 
ch.  of  Sant'  Eustorgio,  Milan,  like  vault 
of  chapel  of  the  Pazzi,  Florence,  142 ;  ch. 


2s8 


INDEX 


of  San  Biagio  at  Montepulciano,  8i  (cut)  ; 
Pisa  cathedral,  12  (cut) ;  ch.  of  Sant' 
Andrea  di  Ponte  Molle,  Rome,  86  ;  An- 
tonio San  Gallo's  design  for  St.  Peter's, 
Rome,  71 ;  Tempietto,  Rome,  44  (cut) ; 
oath,  of  Salamanca  approaches  the  nature 
of  a  Gothic  vault,  57-59  (cut) ;  Todi,  74 
(cut),  77. 

Domestic  architecture.  See  Palace  archi- 
tecture. 

Doorway,  of  De  I'Orme,  203  (cut)  ;  of  Serlio, 
203  (cut). 

Drum,  of  a  dome,  raised  above  the  springing 
of  the  dome,  10-14,  23 ;  dome  set  on  the 
top  of,  12 ;  of  the  dome  of  Florence  cathe- 
dral, 16 ;  the  central  vault  of  the  chapel  of 
the  Pazzi,  Florence,  27  (cut) ;  the  Tem- 
pietto of  San  Pietro  in  Montorio,  Rome, 
44;  St.  Peter's,  Rome,  50  (cut),  53. 

Du  Cerceau,  engraving  of  the  Fountain  of 
the  Innocents,  Paris,  195  (cut) ;  work  of 
Lescot  on  the  Louvre,  197  (cut) ;  work 
of  De  I'Orme  on  the  Tuileries,  201  (cut), 
22i2;  project  for  the  chiteau  of  Charle- 
val,  209. 

Durm,  Die  Dom  Kuppel  in  Florenz,  19I;  Die 
Baukunst  der  Renaissance  in  Italien,  20^  ; 
cited  on  domes,  20I. 

Blast  end  of  the  Redentore,  Venice,  100, 
101. 

Elizabethan  Art,  216-225  (cuts) .  See  Renais- 
sance in  England. 

England,  Renaissance  in.  Architecture  of 
the,  216-246  (cuts).  See  Renaissance  in 
England. 
Burghley  House,  chimneys  in  the  form  of 
a  Doric  order,  217  (cut)  ;  Cranborne 
Manor-House,  porch  and  fagade  illus- 
trate Elizabethan  neo-classic  ornamen- 
tation, 221,  222  (cut) ;  Hardwick  Castle, 
mention  of,  217 ;  Kirby  Hall,  fafades 
of  the  court,  218-220  (cut),  pilasters 
supporting  nothing  but  miniature  ped- 
estals, 219,  window  openings  said  to 
have  been  inserted  by  Inigo  Jones, 
218,  porch,  description  of,  220,  its 
scheme  a  variation  of  Lescot's  Louvre 
pavilions,  220,  gables  of  Flemish  or 
Dutch  origin,  220  (cut)  ;  Longford 
Castle,  221 ;  French  influence  in,  221 ; 
resemblance  to  chiteau  of  Chambord, 
France,  221 ;  Lower  Walterstone  Hall, 
window  illustrating  Elizabethan  neo- 
classic  ornamentation,  221  (cut) ;  Stan- 
way  House,  gatehouse  portal^ieo-classic 
features,  223  ;  Tixall  Castle,  gatehouse, 
neo-classic  ornamentation,  222;  West- 
wood  Park,  porch  in  the  form  of  a 
Roman  triumphal  arch,  223;  Wollaton 
Hall,  neo-classic  ornamentation,   223, 


chimney-stacks  in  the  semblance  of 
Doric  columns,  223,  portal,  224. 

Entablature,  passing  through  the  arch  im- 
post, 29,  30  (cut)  ;  in  Roman  art,  29,  30, 
37 ;  springing  of  a  vault  from,  29,  68 ; 
Vignola's,  85  (cut) ;  removing  of,  be- 
tween the  ressauts,  117  (cut)  ;  Roman 
arch  and  entablature  scheme  applied  to 
a  continuous  arcade,  118,  119;  breaking 
of,  134  (cut),  199  (cut);  used  with  the 
arch  illogically  in  the  portals  of  north 
Italy,  144,  145  (cuts)  ;  ch.  of  Santissima 
Annunziatta,  Arezzo,  83  (cut) ;  the 
chapel  of  the  Pazzi,  Florence,  running 
through  the  impost,  29  (cut) ;  fa9ade  of 
ch.  of  Sant'  Andrea  of  Mantua,  40  (cut)  ; 
ch.  of  Sant'  Andrea  di  Ponte  Molle, 
Rome,  the  two  parts  which  have  no  raison 
d'etre  under  a  vault  have  been  omitted, 
89  (cut) ;  ch.  of  San  Biagio,  Montepulci- 
ano, Rome,  78  (cut);  theGesti,  Rome,  has 
no  ressauts  except  at  the  crossing,  92; 
ch.  of  St.  Paul  outside  the  wall,  Rome, 
30I;  St.  Peter's,  Rome,  interior,  dwarfs 
the  effect  of  its  altitude,  68  ;  facade  of  ch. 
of  San  Francesco  della  Vigna,  Venice, 
100;  of  ch.  of  San  Giorgio  Maggiore, 
Venice,  placed  above  small  pilasters  of 
thearchivolts,98 ;  The  Redentore,  Venice, 
loi ;  Todi,  75,  76  (cut). 

Entablature  block,  in  Roman  art,  30,  37 ;  in 
ch.  of  San  Lorenzo,  Florence,  33  (cut) : 
in  facade  of  Santa  Maria  Novella,  Flor- 
ence, 36  (cut)  ;  in  nave  of  ch.  of  Sant* 
Agostino,  Rome,  72  (cut). 

Entasis  of  columns  in  church  of  San  Giorgio 
Maggiore,  Venice,  98, 

Facades,  of  the  Badia  of  Fiesole,  32  (cut)  ; 
chapel  of  the  Pazzi,  Florence,  30  (cut)  ; 
ch.  of  Santa  Maria  Novella,  Florence, 
35  (cut)  ;  old  St.  Paul's  cathedral,  Lon- 
don, incongruous  mixture  of,  230-232 
(cut)  ;  Whitehall,  London,  banqueting 
hall,  227  (plate),  Westminster  front, 
229  (cut),  circular  court,  230;  ch.  of 
Sant'  Andrea  of  Mantua,  39-42  (cut)  ; 
ch.  of  the  Gesii,  Rome,  Vignola's,  92-95 
(cuts),  Delia  Porta's,  95  (cut)  ;  ch.  of 
Sant'  Andrea  di  Ponte  Molle,  Rome, 
86-88  (cut),  92;  ch.  of  Sant'  Agostino, 
Rome,  74  (cut)  ;  Palazzo  Cancelleria, 
Rome,  description  of,  112-114  (cut),  pro- 
jecting bays  at  each  end,  113,  portal  of 
almost  Greek  purity  of  design,  114;  Pa- 
lazzo Massimi,  Rome,  114-116  (cut)  ;  ch. 
of  San  Giorgio  Maggiore,  Venice,  99 
(cut);  Scuola  di  San  Marco  (Venice), 
156-158  (cut)  ;  ch.  of  Santa  Maria  dei 
Miracole,  Venice,  a  marvel  of  excellence 
in  mechanical  execution,  151,  152  (cut). 


INDEX 


259 


Fiesole,  church  of  the  Badia,  facade,  32  (cut) ; 

likeness  to  chapel  of  the  Pazzi,  32. 
Filarete,  Antonio,  Ospedale  Maggiore,  Milan, 
164  (cut) ;  window  openings,  165  (cut) ; 
arabesque  on  door-valves  of  St.  Peter's, 
Rome,  170  (cut). 
Fine  Arts,  of  an  epoch,  the  expression  of  its 
conditions,    i,   3;    of   the    Renaissance, 
spirit   of,  3,  4,  6;    of   the   Middle  Ages, 
spirit  of,  2,  5. 
Flamboyant  Gothic  style  of  Castle  Chiteau- 

dun,  184  (cut). 
Florence,  condition  in  Middle  Ages  and  in 
Renaissance,  2,  3 ;    Board  of  Works  of 
Florence  cathedral,  21,  22I. 
Badia,  fagade,  32  (cut). 
Baptistery,  dome,  details  of  construction, 
14  (cut)  ;  forms  inspiration  for  dome  of 
the  Florence  cathedral,  16,  20;   entab- 
lature, 30I ;  attic  wall,  31 ;  Ghiberti  gates, 
inorganic  composition  with  over-natu- 
ralism in  details,  173  (cut). 
Cathedral    of,    dome,    10-25  '<    (design    of 
Arnolfo,   13    (cut) ;    modelled   on    the 
dome  of  the  Baptistery,  16,  20,  50 ;  de- 
tails   of   construction,    16-20;    its    rib 
system  gives  it  nothing  of  Gothic  char- 
acter, 20;  shell,  16,  54;  rib  system,  16 
(cuts),    55;    binding    chains,    19,   22; 
magnitude   of  the   work,  21,   22;    de- 
Hberations  of  the    Board    of   Works, 
21I,   22I;    scaffolding,   2i3;    is   funda- 
mentally false  in  principle,  22,  23,  24; 
stability  of,  23  ;  lantern,  25  ;  has  nothing 
of  classic  Roman  character,  25  ;  its  oc- 
tagonal form,  55I;  its  fine  features,  65. 
Chapel   of   the   Pazzi,    26-32   (cuts)  ;    its 
central  vault,   27    (cut),  56;    interior, 
28-30   (cut);    Byzantine   in   form,   29; 
orders  of,  29,  31,  32 ;  entablature,  29, 30 
(cut);  portico,  30  (cut),  134;  panelled 
attic  wall,  31,  81 ;  false  use  of  the  orders, 
109;  leafage  of  capitals,  175. 
Church  of  Santa  Croce,  pulpit,  carving  of, 
171,  172  (cut);  leafage  of  capitals,  176; 
see  Chapel  of  the  Pazzi. 
Church  of  Sant'  Jacopo  Soprarno,  32. 
Church  of  San  Lorenzo,  33 ;  celled  vault, 
33;    mediajval  features,  34;   piers,  34 
(cut). 
Church  of  Santa  Maria  del   Fiore,  false 

front  of  wood  mentioned,  120. 
Church    of    Santa    Maria     Novella,    35; 
fa9ade,   35-38    (cut),    42;    orders,    35 
(cut),  112;  mediaeval  features,  35,  38; 
portal,  36  (cut),  41 ;  tower,  82. 
Church   of  Santo  Spirito,   33 ;    spire-like 
tower  of,  81   (cut)  ;  pseudo-classic  de- 
tails, 82;  lantern,  83. 
Museum,    Roman     arabesque     used     as 
model  for  Renaissance,  167  (cut)  ;   pi- 


laster with   carving  of  a  meaningless 
and  artificial  composition,  173  (cut). 
Palazzo  Bartolini,  109,  window  openmgs, 
109    (cut),    116;    Palazzo   Gondi,    107, 
arcades   of  the  court,   107,  leafage   of 
capitals,  176  (cut)  ;  Palazzo  Guardagni, 
107;  Palazzo  Mozzi,  102;  the  Pitti  pal- 
ace, its  facade  as  monotonous  as  the 
Claudian    aqueduct,   which    it    resem- 
bles, 106;  the  Quaratesi,  106;    Palazzo 
Riccardi,  103  (cut  and  plate),  modera- 
tion shown   in,   103,   no,  facade,    103, 
window  openings,  103,  arcades  of  in- 
terior court,  104 ;  Palazzo  Rucellai,  107, 
108  (cut),  application  of  classic  orders, 
108,  112,  window  openings,  109,  rusti- 
cation of  the  masonry,  109,  resemblance 
between  Palazzo  Cancelleria  and,  112, 
114;     Palazzo    Strozzi,     106,     cornice, 
106,   fortress-like   character,    106;    the 
Strozzino,  106 ;  Palazzo  Vecchio,  102. 
Florentine  Renaissance,  church  architecture 
of  the,  26-43  (cuts  and   plate)  ;    palace 
architecture,  102-rii    (cuts  and   plate)  ; 
see  Renaissance  architecture. 
Foliation,  the  finest  feature  of  Renaissance 

architectural  carving,  174. 
Fontana,  Carlo,  cited  on  dome  of  Pisa,  13I; 
cited  on  stability  of  Florence  dome,  23^ ; 
quoted  on  Michael  Angelo,  55I,  24! ;  cited 
on  safety  of  St.  Peter's  dome,  59 ;  // 
Tempio  Vaticano  e  sua  Origine,  etc.,  Di- 
scritto  dal  Cav.  Carlo  Fontana,  etc.,  71^; 
cited  on  short-sighted  admiration  of  St. 
Peter's,   71 ;    cited    on    binding    chains, 

74- 
France,   Chateaux    of,   see   Renaissance    in 
France. 

Castle  Chateaudun,  portal  and  bay  in  the 
Flamboyant  Gothic  style,  184  (cut). 

Chateau  of  Azay  le  Rideau,  182-187  (cuts)  ; 
general  description,  182-184;  portal 
and  bay  of  characteristic  French  Re- 
naissance design  in  which  neo-classic 
details  are  worked  into  a  pseudo-Gothic 
scheme,  184-187  (cut)  ;  window  open- 
ings, 186;  one  of  the  finest  monuments 
of  the  early  Renaissance  in  the  coun- 
try, 187 ;  portal,  214. 

Chiteau  of  Blois,  cornice  with  neo-classic 
and  mediaeval  elements  combined,  182, 
(cut)  ;  court  fa9ade,  188-190  (cut)  ; 
superimposed  orders  of  pilasters  of  the 
court  facade  ornamented  with  bead 
mouldings,  188  (cut)  ;  polygonal  stair- 
case tower,  190  (cut)  ;  garden  fafade, 
190;  open  gallery  of,  191. 

Chiteau  of  Chambord,  its  multiplicity  of 
soaring  features  resembles  a  late  Gothic 
building,  191 ;  resemblance  of  Longford 
Castle,  England,  to,  221. 


26o 


INDEX 


Chiteau  of  Charleval,  209-213  (cuts) ;  ex- 
terior fa9ade,  pilasters  which  have  no 
entablature  to  support,  210;  unmeaning 
variation  of  the   detail  of  the  several 
bays,  210;  interior  facade,  the  division 
of  the  building  into  two   stories    not 
expressed   on  the  outside,  211;    court 
of    Kirby    Hail,   England,    resembles, 
218. 
Chateau  of   Chenonceaux,    portal  where 
Flam  boyant  idea  is  treated  in  neo-classic 
details,  188  (cut). 
Chateau  of  Ecouen,  architectural  scheme 
is   comparatively  simple,   191 ;    in   the 
portico  of  the  court  is  reproduced  the 
order  of  a  Roman  temple  without  ad- 
mixture of  mediaeval  details  or  Italian 
corruptions,  192. 
Chateau  of  Fontainebleau  follows  the  gen- 
eral character  of  early  French  Renais- 
sance, 191. 
Chateau  of  La  Rochefoucauld,  arcades  of 
the   court   where    Flamboyant    arches 
are  framed  with  pilasters,    188 ;    open 
gallery,  191. 
Chateau  of  St.  Germain  en  Laye,  192, 193 ; 
buttresses,  192;  window  openings,  192. 
Villers  Cotterets,  column  claimed  by  De 
I'Orme  as  his  own  invention,  202  (cut). 
French  architecture.  Renaissance  influence 

upon,  179. 
French   Renaissance.     See  Renaissance   in 

France. 
Frieze,  problem  of  the  arrangement  of  met- 
ope and  triglyph  at  the  end  of,  121,  122 
(cuts) ;  of  library  of  St.  Mark,  Venice, 
123  (cut). 

Galleries,  open,  covered  by  extension  of  the 
main  roof  in  French  chateaux,  191. 

Genoa,  portal  containing  columns  claimed 
by  De  I'Orme  as  his  own  invention,  206. 

Geymiiller,  Baron  H.  von.  Die  urspriing- 
lichen  Entwiirf  fur  Sanct  Peter  in  Rom, 

47"^.  49^- 

Gisors,  Church  of  SS.  Gervais  and  Protais, 
the  west  front  Flamboyant  Gothic  with 
incongruous  Renaissance  details,  214. 

Gotch,  Architecture  of  the  Renaissance  in 
England,  217I ;  cited  on  Kirby  Hall,  Eng- 
land, 2i83 ;  on  Longford  Castle,  England, 
221 ;  on  Tixall  Castle,  222 ;  on  Stanway, 
Westwood  Park,  WoUaton  Hall,  223. 

Gothic,  King  James's,  227. 

Gothic  architectural  carving,  has  at  once  an 
appropriate  architectural  character  and  a 
high  degree  of  excellence  in  the  develop- 
ment of  form,  167,  172;  foliation,  176; 
the  grotesque,  177. 

Gothic  architecture,  development  and  charac- 
ter of,  cited,  7I;  cited  on  dome  of  Sala- 


manca, 572,  592;  cited  on  early  stage  of 
apsidal  vault  development,  59I. 

Gothic  architecture,  one  of  the  three  dis- 
tinctive styles  of  architecture,  6;  beauty 
and  structural  logic  of,  7 ;  use  of  wooden 
ties,  22'^ ;  why  a  dome  cannot  have  the 
character  of  a  Gothic  vault,  20,  21,  56-59 
(cuts) ;  variety  which  arises  through  some 
new  constructive  idea,  211I;  French  Re- 
naissance chateaux  in  which  distorted 
neo-classic  details  are  worked  into  a 
pseudo-Gothic  scheme,  184;  Wren's 
scheme  to  reconcile  the  Gothic  to  a  bet- 
ter manner,  238,  243,  245. 

Gothic  art  forms  a  new  French  order,  a  true 
evolution  out  of  the  ancient  orders  su- 
perbly adapted  to  new  conditions,  206. 

Goujon,  sculptures  of  the  fountain  of  the 
Innocents,  Paris,  196. 

Greek  architectural  carving,  vitality  of,  169 
(cut),  171,  174  (cut);  beauty  of  leafage, 
174, 176  (cuts). 

Greek  architecture,  the  classic  style  which 
was  followed  in  Renaissance  architecture 
was  that  of  the  decadent  Greek  schools 
as  represented  in  Roman  copies,  4,  247 ; 
the  only  proper  use  of  the  classic  order 
made  in,  43, 

Greek  coin  (of  Metapontum),  convention- 
alized ear  of  barley  on,  compared  with 
Renaissance  carving,  169,  170  (cut). 

Greek  sculpture  on  buildings  is  in  a  meas- 
ure independent  of  the  building  on  which 
it  is  placed,  167. 

Grotesque,  the,  in  architectural  carving,  the 
northern  races  only  capable  of  conceiving 
it  in  an  imaginative  way,  177 ;  in  Renais- 
sance architecture  uniformly  weak  and 
characterless,  176,  177  (cuts). 

Guasti,  Santa  Maria  del  Fiore,  132;  quoted 
on  Brunelleschi's  account  of  the  dome  of 
Florence,  18I. 

Gubbio,  his  work  on  the  ducal  palace, 
Venice,  arabesque  after  Roman  model, 
167  (cut). 

Hermas,  of  fa9ade  of  the  Gesti,  Rome,  93 ; 
of  the  Tuileries,  Paris,  207. 

Human  figure,  in  sculpture,  on  buildings, 
167  ;  has  little  proper  architectural  char- 
acter in  the  Renaissance,  167. 

Impost,  continuous,  188I. 

Individuality,   element    of,   in    Renaissance 

architecture,  4;  as  developed  by  Middle 

Ages  and  by  Renaissance,  5. 
Innocent  XI,  Pope,  his  inquiries  as  to  the 

safety  of  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's,  59. 
Intellectual  movement  in  the  Renaissance, 

2,  8. 
Ionic  volutes,  84. 


INDEX 


261 


Italian  domestic  architecture,  102;  unwise 
admixture  of  classic  elements  in,  107, 109 ; 
spirit  of  display  in,  105,  no. 

Italian  genius  for  painting,  6,  7. 

Jamb  shafts,  tapering,   137  (cut),  142,  149, 

ISO- 
Jones,  Inigo,  his  work  on  Kirby  Hall,  Eng- 
land, 2i83;  influence  of  Vitruvius  and 
Palladio  on,  226,  227 ;  travel  and  study  in 
Italy,  227;  Stonehenge  Restored,  2.2rj  \ 
Whitehall,  227-230  (plate  and  cut) ;  Ban- 
queting Hall,  London,  227  (plate) ;  had 
no  true  conception  of  the  principles  of 
classic  art,  230 ;  old  St.  Paul's  west  front, 
230-232  (cut)  ;  the  spirit  of  his  architec- 
ture theatrical,  232. 
Julius  n,  Pope,  the  building  of  St.  Peter's, 
44,46. 

Kent,  William,  The  Designs  of  Inigo  Jones, 
consisting  of  Plans  and  Elevations  for 
Publick  and  Private  Buildings,  2."^^; 
scheme  for  the  palace  of  Whitehall,  Lon- 
don, 229;  old  St.  Paul's  cathedral,  west 
front,  231  (cut). 

Lantern  of  Florence  dome,  25 ;  St.  Peter's, 
Rome,  Bramante's  plan,  52  (cut)  ;  ch.  of 
Santo  Spirito,  Florence,  83. 

Leafage,  Greek  and  Roman  compared,  174- 
176  (cuts)  ;  Renaissance,  175. 

Lescot,  Pierre,  194;  Fountain  of  the  Inno- 
cents, Paris,  194-196  (cut) ;  influence  of 
Serlio,  196 ;  west  wing  of  the  Louvre,  196- 
200  (cut). 

Letarouilly,  Edifices  de  Rome  Moderne,  72^ ; 
cited  on  ch.  of  Sant'  Agostino,  Rome, 
72. 

Loftie,  W.  J.,  Inigo  Jones  and  Sir  Christo- 
pher Wren,  242I. 

Lombard  blind  arcade  recalled  in  the  ch.  of 
Santa  Maria  dei  Miracole,  Venice,  151 
(cut). 

Lombard  Romanesque  architecture,  towers, 
82. 

Lombard  Romanesque,  style  modified  by 
neo-classic  elements  mark  the  Renais- 
sance architecture  of  northern  Italy,  144; 
a  porch  which  forms  a  model  from  which 
an  illogical  Renaissance  portal  is  derived, 
145  (cuts). 

Lombardi,  the,  149;  architectural  carving  of, 
169  (plate). 

Lombardo,  Martino,  Scuola  di  San  Marco, 
Venice,  facade,  156. 

Lombardo,  Pietro,  149  ;  ch.  of  Santa  Maria 
dei  Miracole,  Venice,  151  (cut)  ;  Palazzo 
Corner-Spinelli,  Venice,  160  (plate). 

Lombardo,  Tullio,  149;  ch  of  San  Salvatore, 
Venice,  150. 


London,  St.  Paul's  cathedral,  west  front  of 
old  structure  by  Inigo  Jones,  230,  232 
(cut)  ;  Wren  ordered  to  submit  designs 
for  the  restoration  of,  234 ;  his  drawings 
for  the  new  structure,  235-238  (cuts)  ;  re- 
jected scheme  with  details  of  its  dome, 
23s.  236  (cut)  ;  likeness  of  dome  to  Bra- 
mante's scheme  for  St.  Peter's,  236 ;  like- 
ness to  Michael  Angelo's  scheme,  237; 
facade  of  the  second  design  a  close  copy 
of  Inigo  Jones's,  238;  present  structure 
never  embodied  in  any  set  of  drawings, 
239;  plan  has  no  beauty  comparable  to 
that  of  St.  Peter's,  239  (cut)  ;  comparison 
of,  with  St.  Peter's,  236,  239,  241,  243,  245  ; 
plan  and  elevation,  239 ;  dome,  239-242 
(plate)  ;  recalls  Bramante's  San  Pietro  in 
Montorio,  239 ;  structural  system  of,  240 
(cut)  ;  vaulting  of  the  nave  has  somewhat 
the  effect  of  Gothic  vaulting,  243  ;  use  of 
attic  wall  in  support  of  vaulting,  243  ;  neo- 
classic  orders  of  the  interior,  244,  245 
(cut) ;  intersecting  of  archivolt  and  en- 
tablature, 244;  concealing  of  the  but- 
tresses, 244,  245  (cut) ;  vaulting  of  the 
apse,  245. 

Whitehall,  Banqueting  Hall,  227  (plate) ; 
of  Palladian  design,  228  ;  orders  of  the 
fa9ade,   228 ;    scheme   for    the    palace 
illustrated  by  Kent,  229 ;  plan  is  French 
in  character  rather  than  Italian,  229; 
order  of  the  basement  has  a  structural 
character,  229  (cut) ;  facade  of  circular 
court,  orders  of,  230. 
Church  of  St.  Stephen's,  246 ;    ch.  of  St. 
Bride's,  246;    ch.  of  St.   Mary-le-Bow, 
246;  ch.  of  St.  Peter's,  Cornhill,  246. 
Longhena,  architect,  Palazzo  Pesaro,  Venice, 
163. 

Maderna,  the  western  bays  of  St.  Peter's, 
Rome,  68. 

Majano,  Benedetto  da,  the  Palazzo  Strozzi, 
Florence,  106. 

Mantua,  church  of  Sant'  Andrea,  38-42  (cut 
and  plate)  ;  erected  and  ornamented  on 
Roman  models,  38;  nave,  38  (plate); 
piers,  38,  39,  53;  its  interior  one  of  the 
finest  of  the  Renaissance,  39 ;  its  scheme 
foreshadows  that  of  St.  Peter's,  39,  53 ; 
facade,  39-42  (cut) ;  early  use  of  so-called 
colossal  order,  40  (cut),  53,  66;  resem- 
blance of  central  arch  to  that  of  ch.  of 
Santa  Maria  Novella,  Florence,  41 ; 
panelled  pifasters,  41,  160;  reflection  of, 
seen  in  Bramante's  church  of  San  Satire 
of  Milan,  138. 

Martin,  Hist,  de  France,  180^. 

Mathematici,  Parere  di  tre,  sopra  i  danni 
che  si  sono  trovato  nella  cupola  di  S. 
Pietro,  etc.,  60I. 


262 


INDEX 


Mathematicians'  report  on  the  condition  of 

St.  Peter's  dome  in  1742,  60. 
Mediaeval  art,  structural  forms  of,  formed, 
for  the  most  part,  the  basis  of  Renais- 
sance design,  43,  247;    considered  false 
and  barbaric  by  the  neo-classicists,  97, 
248  ;  its  architects  transformed  the  classic 
orders  in  a  creative  viray,  248. 
Melani,    Archittetura    Italiana,    150I,    154I, 
250^;     quoted    on    architecture    of    the 
Renaissance,  250. 
Metope,  problem  of  making  half  a  metope 
fall  at  the  end  of  the  frieze,   121,   122 
(cuts). 
Michelozzi,    The   Riccardi,   Florence,   103; 
praised   by  Vasari,   105;    the   Strozzino, 
Florence,  106;  chapel  of  St.  Peter  Martyr, 
ch.  of  Sant'  Eustorgio,  Milan,  142;   his 
work  m  Venice,  149. 
Middle  .Ages,  conditions  of  the,  I ;  spirit  of, 
and  that  of  the  Renaissance,  2,5-6;  in- 
dividuality of,  5. 
Middleton,  Ancient  Rome,  52I ;  cited  on  the 

dome  of  the  Pantheon,  52I. 
Milan,  church  of  Sant'  Eustorgio,  chapel  of 
St.    Peter   Martyr,    142;    circular   celled 
vault,  142. 
Church  of  San  Lorenzo  mentioned,  140. 
Church  of  Santa  Maria  delle  Grazie,  140 
(cut)  ;    description    of   exterior,    140 ; 
dome,  140;   its   encircling  arcade  sug- 
gests the  encircling  colonnade  of  the 
dome  of  St.  Peter's,  142. 
Church    of    Monasterio    Maggiore,    142; 

compound  window  openings,  143. 
Church  and  sacristy  of  San  Satiro,  138- 
140  (cut)  ;  reflects  ch.  of  St.  Andrea  of 
Mantua,  138 ;  orders  of  the  interior  of 
the  sacristy,  139  (cut). 
Ospedale  Maggiore,    164;   larger  features 
are  of  mixed   and  debased  mediaeval 
character  with  no  application  of  classic 
orders, 164;  window  openings,  165  (cut). 
Palazzo  Brera,  arches  sprung  from  pairs  of 
columns  connected  by  short  entabla- 
tures, 166. 
Milanesi,  cited,  34I,  35. 

Milizia,  Memorie  degli  Architette,  etc., 
quoted,  232,  84I ;  cited  on  Alberti,  35,  44; 
cited  on  use  of  entablature  block,  36 ;  cited 
on  safety  of  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's,  58^ ; 
cited  on  the  strengthening  of  the  dome  of 
St.  Peter's,  62;  on  ch.  of  Consolazione  at 
Todi,  74;  on  spire-like  tower  of  ch.  of 
Santo  Spirito,  Florence,  81 ;  cited  on 
Vignola,  84;  on  dome  of  Sant'  Andrea 
di  Ponte  Molle,  Rome,  86  ;  on  window 
op>enings  framed  with  orders,  crowned 
with  pediments,  109;  quoted  on  Sanso- 
vino,  119,  121;  quoted  on  Vignola,  128; 
quoted  on  De  I'Orme,  194. 


Montalembert,  cited,  5I. 

Montepulciano,  church  of  San  Biagio,  77-83 
(cuts) ;  interior,  78-80  (cut) ;  ressauts, 
78,  90;  Doric  order,  78;  use  of  pilasters 
on  the  angles,  78,  81 ;  exterior,  81-83 
(cut)  ;  dome,  81  ;  facade,  81 ;  panels  of 
upper  story,  81 ;  orders,  81,  83 ;  towers,  8i. 

Naples  museum,  composite  capital  showing 
Roman  leafage,  175. 

Nave  of  ch.  of  Santissima  Annunziatta, 
Arezzo,83  (cut) ;  Sant'  Andrea  of  Mantua, 
38  (plate)  ;  ch.  of  Sant'  Agostino,  Rome, 
72;  ch.  of  San  Giorgio  Maggiore,  Venice, 
97.  98. 

Nelli,  Discorsi  di  Architettura,  2i3 ;  quoted 
on  Brunelleschi's  scaffolding,  2i'^ ;  cited 
on  stability  of  Florence  dome,  238,  24I. 

Neo-classicists,  their  confidence  in  the  art 
of  Roman  antiquity  as  the  embodiment 
of  all  true  principles  of  architectural  de- 
sign, 97. 

Neo-pagan  spirit  of  the  Renaissance,  2,  4,  8. 

Nicholas  V,  Pope,  rebuilding  of  basilica  of 
St.  Peter,  47. 

Norton,  C.  E.,  Church  Building  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  21I;  cited  on  building  of 
the  dome  of  the  Florence  cathedral,  21I. 

Openings,  mediaeval  Florentine  form,  102 
(cut) ;  of  domestic  architecture  in  Perugia, 
102 ;  reveals  are  shallow  in  earlier  build- 
ings, 104 ;  cathedral  of  Como,  variety  of 
illogical  forms  in,  148  (cut).  See  Window 
openings. 

Order  and  symmetry  of  a  mechanical  kind 
seen  in  Renaissance  architecture,  133. 

Order,  colossal,  so-called,  early  use  of,  40. 

Order,  classic,  use  of  without  structural 
meaning  in  Renaissance  architecture, 
6,  29,  43,  244;  Brunelleschi's  use  of,  26; 
unsuitable  for  a  building  of  mediaeval 
character,  29,  43 ;  disposition  of,  in  various 
Renaissance  facades,  42;  misapplication 
and  distortion  of  by  Italians  of  the  Renais- 
sance, 43 ;  used  with  propriety  by  the 
Greeks  alone,  43 ;  the  usual  size  of,  com- 
pared with  that  of  St.  Peter's,  Rome,  67 ; 
Vignola's  treatise  on  the  Five  Orders,  84 ; 
the  proportions  of  the,  altered  by  Vignola, 
85;  Vitruvius  quoted  on  maintaining  the 
purity  of,  86;  inappropriate  in  a  church 
interior,  98 ;  application  of,  in  palace 
architecture,  107,  109;  Renaissance  in- 
novation in  spacing  the  columns  of, 
112,  114;  podium  introduced  beneath, 
112;  where  the  columns  of,  act  some- 
what as  buttresses,  131;  aberrations  and 
makeshifts  made  necessary  by  efforts 
to  apply  the  classic  orders  to  uses  for 
which    they    were     not    adapted,    244; 


INDEX 


263 


transformed  by  the  mediaeval  architects 
in    a    creative    way,   248 ;     De    I'Orme's 
claim  of  having  invented  a  new  order, 
which  he  called  the  French  order,  202 
(cut),  206. 
Of  the  Parthenon,  Athens,  67 ;  the  Temple 
of  the  Sun  at  Baalbek,  67I ;  chapel  of 
the  Pazzi,  Florence,  29,  30  (cut)  ;    ch, 
of  Santa  Maria  Novella,  Florence,  35, 
42  (cut)  ;    Palazzo  Rucellai,  Florence, 
108,   109    (cut) ;    St.    Paul's,    London, 
interior,  difficulties  of  combining  neo- 
classic  style  of,  with  the  high  vaulting, 
243,  244 ;    Whitehall,  banqueting  hall, 
London,   228    (plate),  229  (cut),  230; 
ch.    of  Sant'   Andrea   of   Mantua,   40 
(cut),  42;  ch.  of  San  Biagio  at  Monte- 
pulciano,  78,   81    (cuts) ;    Duomo    of 
Pienza,  42;  St.  Peter's,  Rome,  interior, 
53,  66,  dwarfs  the  effect  of  magnitude 
in  the  interior,  67,  size  compared  with 
that  of  the  Parthenon  and   Pantheon, 
67,  diminishes  the  effect  of  aldtude  of 
the  vaulting,  68;    Palazzo  Cancelleria, 
Rome,    podium    introduced    beneath, 
112,    innovation    in    spacing  the    col- 
umns of,   113;    court  of  Palazzo  Far- 
nese,  Rome,  treatment   of  the  capital, 
118;  ch.  of  San  Francesco  della  Vigna, 
Venice,  100 ;  ch.  of  San  Giorgio  Mag- 
giore,  Venice,  raised  on  pedestals,  98, 
loi,  placed  under  the  archivolts,  98 ; 
library  of  St.  Mark,  Venice,  122,  123 
(cuts)  ;  Palazzo  Contarini,  Venice,  161 ; 
Palazzo  Vendramini,  Venice,  full  orders 
in  all  three  stories  of  fa9ade,  161,  162, 
arrangement  in   lateral  bay  of  fa9ade, 
162 ;  town  hall  portico  of  Vicenza,  the 
columns    of,    act     somewhat    as    but- 
tresses, 130,  131.     See  Columns. 
Ornamentation,   architectural,   use   of    arti- 
ficial elements  in,  172-174  (cuts)  ;  use  of 
forms   drawn  from  organic  nature,   174. 
See  Carving,  architectural. 
Oxford,   St.   Mary's    Church,    porch,   men- 
tioned, 227 ;    Sheldonian  theatre.  Wren 
quoted  on,  234. 

Padua,  town  hall,  Palladio's  scheme  for  town 
hall  of  Vicenza  derived  from,  130,  131. 

Painting,  Italian  genius  for,  6,  7;  most  Re- 
naissance architects  were  painters  and 
sculptors,  6,  7,  84,  96. 

Palace  architecture  of  the  Renaissance, 
Florentine,  102-111  (cuts  and  plate) ; 
Roman,  112-134  (cuts) ;  of  North  Italy, 
154-166  (cuts) ;  Venetian,  154-163  (cuts). 
See  Renaissance  architecture. 

Pallailian  architecture,  95;  introduced  into 
England  by  Jones,  227;  far  from  true 
to   classic  design,  228,   230;     rules  are 


arbitrary  and  not  in  accord  with  the  true 
principles  of  ancient  art,  248. 
Palladio,  Quatro  libri  deW  Architettiira  di 
Andrea  Palladio,  96^;  his  influence 
greater  than  that  of  any  other  architect 
of  the  Renaissance,  95,  248  ;  quoted  on 
his  study  of  architecture,  96,  97  ;  quoted 
on  his  admiration  of  his  own  work,  131I; 
his  compositions  based  on  order  and 
symmetry  of  a  mechanical  kind,  133 ; 
concerned  with  the  superficial  appear- 
ance in  architecture,  133;  ch.  of  San 
Francesco  della  Vigna,  Venice,  100;  ch. 
of  San  Giorgio  Maggiore,  Venice,  97- 
100  (cuts);  ch.  of  the  Redentore,  Venice, 
100  (cut)  ;  Palazzo  Valmarano,  Venice, 
133 ;  Loggia  Bernarda,  Vicenza,  133 
(cut) ;  Palazzo  Colleone-Porta,  Vicenza, 
133;  Palazzo  Porta-Barbarano,  Vicenza, 
133  ;  the  portico  of  the  town  hall,  Vi- 
cenza, 130-132  (cut). 
Pallaiuolo,    Simone,     Palazzo    Guardagni, 

Florence,  107. 
Palustre,  Leon,  L' Architecture  de  la  Renais- 
sance, Zij^ ;  quoted  on  the  entablature 
of  St.  Andrea  di  Ponte  Molle,  Rome,  89. 
Paris,  Church  of  St.  Etienne  du  Mont,  of 
Flamboyant  Gothic  form,  with  neo-classic 
west  front  and  central  portal,  213,  214; 
portal  with  columns  modelled  after  those 
claimed  by  De  TOrme  as  his  own  inven- 
tion, 214. 

Church  of  St.  Eustache,  a  Gothic  structure 
overlaid  with  Renaissance  details,  213. 
Fountain  of  the  Innocents,  194-196  (cut)  ; 
a  reproduction   of  the    scheme    of  a 
Roman  triumphal  arch,  196. 
Hotel  Cluny,  a  forerunner  of  the  Renais- 
sance chateaux,  180. 
Louvre,  Lescot's  work  on  the  west  wing, 
196-200   (cut);    orders,  198,  199;    the 
salient  pavilions,  have  no  function,  198  ; 
breaking  of  the   entablature   in,    199; 
sculptured  festoons  heavy  and  formal, 
199. 
Palace  of  the  Tuileries,  work  of  De  I'Orme, 
200-207  (cuts);  peculiar  form  of  column 
claimed  by  De  I'Drme  as  his  invention, 
201-206  (cut) ;  basement  arcade,  207 ; 
attic  story,  207. 
Parthenon,  metal  clamps  in  masonry,  22^; 

effect  of  a  dome  erected  on,  89. 
Pavia,  Church  of  the  Certosa,  general  de- 
scription of  faqade,  136-137;  Lombard 
Romanesque  forms  with  pseudo-classic 
elements  engrafted  on  them,  137 ;  window 
openings,  137  (cut). 

Church    of    San    Pietro   in   Cielo   d'Oro, 
portal   framed  by  structural  members 
without  structural  meaning,  148  (cut). 
Pazzi,  Chapel  of  the.    See  Florence. 


264 


INDEX 


Pediment,  breaking  of  the,  93-95  (cut),  117 
(cut) ;  one  placed  within  another,  95 
(cut)  ;  of  Baalbek,  95  (cut). 

Pellegrini,  Palazzo  Brera,  Milan,  166. 

Perugia,  domestic  architecture,  102. 
Church  of  S.  Bernardmo,  general  descrip- 
tion of  facade,  135  (plate)  ;  affords  a 
rare  instance  of  the  use  of  colour  in 
Renaissance  architecture,  135. 

Peruzzi,  Baldassare,  his  plan  for  St.  Peter's, 
Rome,  47^;  Palazzo  Massimi,  Rome, 
114-116  (cut). 

Piers,  pierced  transversely  and  longitudi- 
nally, 38,  39,  150  (cuts) ;  ch.  of  Santis- 
sima  Annunziatta,  Arezzo,  83  (cut)  ;  ch. 
of  Saii  Lorenzo,  Florence,  34  (cut)  ; 
ch&teau  of  Blois,  France,  polygonal  stair- 
case tower,  190  (cut)  ;  ch.  of  Sant"  Andrea 
of  Mantua,  38,  39  (plate)  ;  ch.  of  Sant' 
Agostino,  Rome,  alternate  system,  72; 
St.  Peter's,  Rome,  53,  66,  68;  Todi,  75, 
76  (cut) ;  ch.  of  San  Giorgio  Maggiore, 
Venice,  97,  98  (cut) ;  ch.  of  St.  Mark, 
Venice,  150  (cut) ;  ch.  of  San  Salvatore, 
Venice,  151  (cut).      See  Orders. 

Pietra  Santa,  Giacomo  da,  said  to  have  built 
the  ch.  of  Sant'  Agostino,  Rome,  72. 

Pilaster  strips,  form  proper  decoration  for 
mediaeval  structures,  29,  82. 

Pilasters,  coupling  of,  31 ;  use  of,  in  the 
treatment  of  the  angles  of  buildings,  78- 
81  (cut)  ;  the  panelling  of,  160;  of  Kirby 
Hall,  England,  support  nothing  but  mini- 
ature pedestals,  219 ;  portico  of  the  chapel 
of  the  Pazzi,  31  (cut)  ;  fafade  of  Santa 
Maria  Novella,  Florence,  37, 38 ;  National 
Museum,  Florence,  meaningless  and  arti- 
ficial design  in  carving,  173  (cut) ; 
chateau  of  Azay  le  Rideau,  France, 
combination  of  pseudo-Gothic  and  neo- 
classic  forms,  186  (cut) :  facade  of  ch. 
of  Sant'  Andrea  of  Mantua,  41  (cut)  ; 
San  Biagio,  Montepulciano,  use  of,  on  the 
angles  in  interior,  78  (cut) ;  Palazzo  Con- 
tarini,  Venice,  grouping  of  those  of  three 
different  proportions  and  magnitudes,  161 
(cut).    See  Orders. 

Pisa  cathedral,  dome,  12. 

Pisan  Romanesque  architecture,  of  fa9ade 
of  Santa  Maria  Novella,  Florence,  37. 

Poleni,  Memorie  Istorische  delle  Gran  Cupola 
del  Tempio  Vaticano,  598;  his  strength- 
ening of  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's,  62,  63; 
quoted  on  poor  work  of  Bramante,  64. 

Pollaiuolo,  Simione,  called  II  Cronaca,  court 
and  cornice  of  Palazzo  Strozzi,  Florence, 
106. 

Pontoise,  church  of  St.  Maclou,  remarkable 
Renaissance  north  portal,  214. 

Porches,  church  of  San  Zeno  of  Verona,  a 
model  from  which  an  illogical  form  of 


Renaissance  portal  is  deinved,  146 
(cut)  ;  Cranborn  Manor-House,  Eng- 
land, illustrates  Elizabethan  neo-classic 
ornamentation,  221,  222  (cut) ;  Kirby 
Hall,  England,  220;  resemble  Louvre 
pavilions,  220. 

Portals,  from  Serlio,  in  which  the  entablature 
is  removed  between  the  ressauts,  117,  118 
(cut) ;  illogical  use  of  arch  and  entabla- 
ture in  the  portals  of  north  Italy,  144, 
145  (cuts)  ;  illogical  Renaissance  portal 
derived  from  the  porch  of  San  Zeno  of 
Verona,  146  (cut)  ;  unreason  of  Renais- 
sance portals  compared  with  those  of 
Greek  or  Gothic  art,  156;  of  cath.  of 
Como,  illogical  use  of  arch  and  en- 
tablature, 144,  145  (cut),  149;  Stanway 
House  (England)  gatehouse,  neo-classic 
features,  223;  Wollaton  Hall,  England,, 
illustrates  Elizabethan  neo-classic  orna- 
mentation, 224  (cut) ;  ch.  of  Santa  Maria 
Novella,  Florence,  36  (cut),  41;  ch3.teau 
of  Azay  le  Rideau,  France,  neo-classic 
details  worked  into  a  pseudo-Gothic 
scheme,  184;  chiteau  of  Chenonceaux,. 
France,  Flamboyant  and  neo-classic 
forms  combined,  188  (cut) ;  ch.  of  San 
Pietro  in  Cielo  d'  Oro,  Pavia,  148  (cut) ; 
Palazzo  Cancelleria,  Rome,  of  almost 
Greek  purity  of  design,  114;  Scuola  di 
San  Marco,  Venice,  156  (cut)  ;  Porta  del 
Palio,  Verona,  125  (cut) . 

Portico,  chS.teau  of  Ecouen,  the  order  of  a> 
Roman  temple  is  produced  without  ad- 
mixture of  mediaeval  details  or  Italian 
corruptions,  192. 

Raphael,  plans  for  St.  Peter's,  Rome,  47^. 

Ravenna,  ch.  of  San  Vitale  mentioned,  140. 

Relief  carving  of  the  Renaissance,  see  Carv- 
ing, Architectural,  of  the  Renaissance. 

Renaissance,  conditions  of,  i ;  intellectual 
movement  in,  2,  8 ;  neo-pagan  revival  in, 
2,  8 ;  its  spirit  as  manifested  in  its  fine 
arts,  3,  4,  6,  8 ;  its  architects  were  sculp>- 
tors  and  painters,  6;  art  of  painting  in,  7. 

Renaissance  architecture,  element  of  indi- 
viduality in,  4,  6;  the  classic  style  which, 
was  followed  was  that  of  the  decadent 
Greek  schools  as  represented  in  Roman 
copies,  4,  247 ;  architects  were  generally 
also  painters  and  sculptors,  6,  96;  a  sur- 
face architecture,  6 ;  little  heed  given  to 
structural  propriety,  23,  64,  66,  116;  use 
of  the  classic  order,  29 ;  passing  of  the 
entablature  through  the  arch  imposts,  29; 
use  of  stucco,  32;  alternation  of  wide- 
and  narrow  intervals,  38 ;  misapplication 
of  the  classic  orders,  43,  247 ;  the  design- 
ers worked  on  a  foundation  of  mediaeval 
ideas  from  which  they  could  not    free- 


INDEX 


265 


themselves,    43,    247;     use    of    Roman 
models,  43, 117, 119,  247  ;  breaking  of  the 
pediment,  93  (cut),  117;  use  of  structural 
members  without  structural  meaning,  116, 
133,  135,   156,  165 ;  entablature  removed 
between  the  ressauts,  117;  later  architec- 
ture the  work  of  men  of  little  genuine  ar- 
tistic inspiration,  119,  133  ;    architectural 
shams  extensively  produced  by  later  archi- 
tects, 121,  132;    attempt  to  make  half  a 
metope  fall  at  the  end  of  the  frieze,  121- 
122  (cut)  ;  barbaric  compositions  of  fre- 
quent occurrence  in  later,  124;  based  on 
order  and    symmetry   of    a    mechanical 
kind,  133 ;  independent  personal  effort  to 
be  original  at  the  bottom  of  most  of  the 
mistakes  of,  206 ;  no  architects  of,  had  a 
true    conception    of    the    principles    of 
classic  art,  230 ;  theatrical   in   its   spirit, 
232;    no  true  adaptation  of  classic  ele- 
ments in  Renaissance  design,  247 ;  great 
influence  of  short-sighted  and  mechani- 
cal  Italian  rules   in  modern  times,  248, 
250;  claims  advanced  for  it  as  the  only 
architecture    of  correct  principles  since 
that  of  classic  antiquity  are  without  justi- 
fication, 250;    sculpture  of,  see  Carving, 
architectural,  of  the  Renaissance. 
Renaissance  architecture,  in  England,  216- 
246  (cuts)  ; 
Elizabethan   art,  216-225    (cuts) ;  its  best 
features  were  of  native  growth  out  of 
the  mediaeval  feudal  castle  and  the  latest 
phase   of   perpendicular    Gothic,   216, 
225 ;  use  of  classic   details,  217,  218- 
225   (cuts) ;    flimsiness  of    material  in 
interiors  and  ornamental  details,  217, 
218;  buildings  have  little  foreign  char- 
acter in  plan   and    outline,  but    neo- 
classic  forms  are  confined  to  ornamen- 
tation, 218,  221 ;  strange  aberrations  of 
design  wrought  by  foreigners  and  native 
craftsmen,    218-225     (cuts)  ;     fantastic 
gables    features    of    the    more    showy 
architecture,  220;  Flemish  and  Dutch 
ornamental  workers,  220,  224;  the  de- 
sign  and  execution   of   the   buildings 
were  performed  by  building  craftsmen, 
224,  225. 
Work  of  Jones  and  Wren,  226-246  (plate 
and  cuts) ;  use  of  classic  details  becom- 
ing established,  226,  228;    acceptance 
of  neo-classic  style  by  the  people,  228, 
232,  233. 
Renaissance  architecture,  Florentine ;  church 
architecture,  26-43  (cuts) ;  palace  archi- 
tecture, 102-111    (cuts   and  plate).     See 
also  Renaissance  architecture  and  Flor- 
ence. 
Renaissance  architecture,  in  France,  early, 
179-193  (cuts) ;  the  French  Renaissance 


chateau,  conditions  which  gave  rise  to, 
180 ;  evolved  from  the  feudal  castle  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  180,  201 ;  factitious  in  com- 
position, 179,  i8r,  2ii3;  distorted  neo- 
classic  details  worked  into  a  pseudo- 
Gothic  scheme,  184,  190;  a  survival  of 
later  Gothic  habit  of  design  is  shown 
where  the  continuity  of  upright  lines  is 
obtained  in  the  use  of  superimposed 
pilasters  with  ressauts  in  the  entablatures, 
188,  190;  has  a  distinctly  French  expres- 
sion, 179,  193,  194 ;  later  French  Renais- 
sance given  a  more  marked  neo-classic 
dress  by  Lescot  and  De  I'Orme,  194-215  ; 
misuse  of  structural  forms  in  ornamenta- 
tion, 199 ;  excessive  profusion  of  orna- 
ment, 200;  church  architecture,  Gothic 
structural  forms  largely  entwined  with  a 
misapplication  of  classic  details,  213-215. 

Renaissance  architecture,  Lombard,  135, 
136-149;  neo-classic  influences  confined 
largely  to  ornamental  details,  136 ;  illogi- 
cal scheme  of  openings  which  became 
characteristic  of,  144-149  (cuts). 

Renaissance  architecture.  North  Italian,  pro- 
fusion of  ornament  a  marked  character- 
istic of,  136 ;  Lombard  Romanesque  forms 
modified  by  neo-classic  features  mark  the 
character  of,  144 ;  church  architecture  of 
the,  135-153  (cuts)  ;  mixture  of  mediaeval 
and  pseudo-classic  forms,  149;  palace 
architecture  of  the,  154-166  (cuts) ;  later 
architecture  of  the,  based  on  the  art  of 
Palladio  and  Vignola,  165.  See  Renais- 
sance architecture. 

Renaissance  architecture,  Venetian,  135; 
church  architecture,  149-153  ;  palace  ar- 
chitecture, 154-163  (cuts);  its  most  charac- 
teristic architecture  is  that  of  the  palaces  of 
the  grand  canal,  159;  the  usual  scheme  of 
the  front  that  of  a  wide  central  bay  wholly 
occupied  by  openings  flanked  by  lateral 
bays  with  a  solid  wall  on  either  side  of  an 
opening,  162,  163;  neo-classic  influences 
confined  largely  to  ornamental  details,. 
136 ;  illogical  scheme  of  openings  which 
became  characteristic  of,  144-149  (cuts) ; 
drew  some  of  its  material  from  Florentine 
and  Lombard  sources,  149;  later  archi- 
tecture follows  the  measurably  uniform 
style  of  Vignola  and  Palladio,  153,  162 ; 
overlaying  with  heavy  orders  the  typical 
unequal  main  divisions  of  the  palace 
fronts,  162,  163. 

Ressauts,  irrational  use  of,  38 ;  of  fagade  of 
Santa  Maria  Novella,  Florence,  37;  of 
San  Francesco  of  Rimini,  38;  of  ch. 
of  Santa  Maria  degli  Angeli,  Assisi, 
89. 

Rhenish  Romanesque  style  of  ch.  of  Sant' 
Agostino,  Rome,  72. 


266 


INDEX 


Ribs,  system  of,  in  Florence  dome,  16-19,  SS 
(cuts) ;  in  Gothic  vaulting  have  nothing 
of  the  character  of  dome  ribs,  20,  21,  56; 
of  St.  Peter's  dome,  Rome,  55,  56,  59 ;  of 
cath.  of  Salamanca,  57,  58. 
Riccio,  Antonio,  his  work  on  east  side  of  the 
court  of  the   Ducal  Palace,  Venice,  154 
(plate). 
Rimini,  San   Francesco  of,  church  of,   35; 
fa9ade,  38,  42;  modelled  on  the  arch  of 
Septimius  Severus,  38,  42;  ressauts,  38. 
Roman  arch  and  entablature  scheme  applied 

to  a  continuous  arcade,  118,  119. 
Roman  architecture,   furnished  models  for 
Renaissance  architecture,  38,  40,  43,  97 ; 
use  of  entablature  block  in,  37 ;  use  of 
the  arch  in,  37;   the  ressaut,  38;   trium- 
phal arch  design  a  model  for  Renaissance 
fa9ades,  38,  39-43  (cut)  ;  treatment  of  the 
angle,  79  (cut). 
R  •man     architectural     carving,     furnished 
models  for  Renaissance  work,  167 ;  taste- 
less and  meaningless  designs,  170I ;  leaf- 
age of,  compared  with  Greek  leafage,  174 
(cuts). 
Roman  Renaissance,  church  architecture  of 
the,  66-101  (cuts)  ;  palatial  architecture, 
1 12-134.     See  Renaissance  architecture 
and  Rome. 
Romanesque     architecture,     7;      Rhenish 
Romanesque     style     of    ch.    of     Sant' 
Agostino,  Rome,  72. 
Rome,   its    monuments  the    inspiration  of 
Renaissance  architecture,  3,  43,  247. 
St.  Peter's,  rebuilding  and  demolishing  of 
the  old  basilica,  47;   work  of  Rossel- 
lino,   47 ;    work    of    Bramante,    47-53 
(cuts),  63,  64,  70;  date  of  the  beginning 
of  building,  47;  general  plan,  47,  53, 
66  (cut)  ;    the  plans   of  Raphael   and 
Peruzzi,  472 ;  work  of  Michael  Angelo, 
54-65  (cuts) ,  66  ;  work  of  Maderna,  66, 
245 ;    short-sighted  admiration  of,  71 ; 
design    of   Antonio    San    Gallo,    71 ; 
influence  of,  seen   in  other  churches, 
90,  92 ;  arabesque  on  door-valves,  170 
(cut)  ;   Wren's  scheme  for  St.   Paul's 
based  on  the  model  of,  236,  237 ;  com- 
parison of,  with  St.  Paul's,  236,  239,  241, 

243.  245- 

Dome,  44-65  (cuts) ;  use  of  the  Pan- 
theon and  the  Basilica  of  Max- 
entius  as  models,  49-52  (cuts) ; 
drum,  50  (cut),  53;  abutments,  50 
(cut),  53;  colonnade,  51,  56,  142; 
lantern,  52;  piers,  53,  66,  68;  but- 
tresses, 53  (cut),  55,  56,  59;  design 
of  Michael  Angelo,  53-65  (cuts) ;  his 
alterations  of  Bramante's  scheme,  53- 
55,  64;  attic,  54  (cut);  vault  shells, 
54  (cut),  55;  ribs,  55, 56,  59;  binding 


chains,  59,  60,  62  ;   ruptures  in,  59, 
60-63    (cut),    64  ;     mathematicians' 
report  of  the  condition  of  the  struc- 
ture in  1742,  60  (cut)  ;   violation  of 
laws  of  stability  in,  64,  65 ;  strength- 
ening of  Bramante's  work,  64I  ;    its 
beauty  exaggerated,  65 ;   likeness  of 
Wren's  scheme  of  St.  Paul's  to,  236. 
Exterior,  68-70  (cut) ;  makeshifts  neces- 
sitated  by   the   use   of  the   colossal 
order,  68-70  (cut)  ;  aisle  walls  carried 
to  the   height   of  the  clerestory,  68, 
245 ;    domes  over  the  aisles,  68-70 
(cut),  245. 
Interior,    Bramante's    scheme,    53,   66; 
Michael  Angelo's   work,  53,  66-70; 
piers,  53,  66,  68 ;  effect  of  magnitude 
dwarfed  by  the  colossal  order,  53,  67, 
68  ;   great  size  of  the  structural  parts, 
68 ;    part  of  the  vault  hidden  by  the 
cornice,  68,  92;    its  ornamentation  a 
cheap  deception,  71  ;    ressauts,  90, 
92. 
Church  of  the  Gesii,  91-95  (cuts) ;  Vigno- 
la's    plan   given    in   his   book   on   the 
Five     Orders,    92;      interior,    general 
scheme,   92;    orders,  92;    entablature 
92 ;     facade,     92-95     (cuts)  :     broken 
pediments  of,  93,  95 ;  scroll  work  and 
hermae,    93 ;    reversed    consoles,    95 ; 
tablets,  95  (cut). 
Church  of  Sant'  Agostino,  72-74  (cuts) ; 
its  architects,  72 ;  date,  72 ;  the  general 
style    is    Rhenish    Romanesque,    72; 
nave,    72;     Renaissance     ornamental 
details,  72  (cut)  ;  facade,  73,  74  (cut)  ; 
truncated  pediment,  74;  tablets  in  wall 
surface,  74 ;  dome,  74. 
Church  of  Sant'  Andrea  di  Ponte  Molle, 
86-89  (cuts)  ;   dome,  86 ;  facade,  86-88 
(cut),  92,  loi ;  likeness  to  the  Pantheon, 
87;  entablature,  89  (cut). 
Church  of  San  Biagio,  entablature,  78  (cut) , 
Church     of     Santa    Maria    della    Pace, 

cloister  arcade,  119. 
Church  of  St.  Paul  outside  the  wall,  entab- 
lature, 30!. 
The  Tempietto,  44-46   (cut) ;    the   dome 
and  its  drum,  44,  74;   resemblance  to 
the  temple  of  Vesta,  44,  45 ;  orders,  45, 
83;    dome  of  St.  Paul's,   London,  re- 
calls, 239. 
Arch  of  Septimius  Severus  used  as  model 
of  facades  by  Alberti,  38,  39-43  (cut) ; 
treatment  of  angle  in,  79. 
Arch  of  the  Silversmiths,  39. 
Arch  of  Titus,  scheme  of,  used  by  Sanso- 
vino  in  the  Loggetta  of  the  Campanile, 
Venice,  123. 
Basilica  of  Maxentius,  columns  and  arches, 
37 ;  as  model  for  St.  Peter's,  49. 


INDEX 


267 


Baths  of  Caracalla,  entablature,  29. 
Pantheon,  10,  15!,  87;  said  to  be  taken  as 
model  for  dome  of  Florence  cathedral, 
16  ;  grandeur  of,  23  ;  as  model  for  Bra- 
mante's   dome   of  St.   Peter's,   49,   52 
(cuts);  its  internal  character, 52I;  abut- 
ments, 49  (cut) ,  52 ;  not  a  homogeneous 
structure,  89. 
Porta  Maggiore,  form  of  column  similar  to 
that  claimed  by  De  I'Orme  as  his  own 
invention,  205. 
Temple  of  Peace.    See  Basilica  of  Maxen- 

tius. 
Theatre  of  Marcellus,  its  facade  followed 
by  Sansovino    for  the  library  of   St. 
Mark's,  122. 
Palazzo  Cancelleria,  facade,  112-114  (cut), 
window   openings,    north    Italian,   112, 
149;  podium  introduced  beneath  each 
order,  112;  spacing  of  the  columns  of 
the  order,  112,  114;  projecting  bays  at 
each  end,  113;  portal  of  almost  Greek 
purity  of  design,  114;  court,  114. 
Palazzo  Farnese,  116-118;  window  open- 
ings   framed    by   structural    members 
without   structural    meaning,    116,    117 
(cut) ;  removal  of  entablature  between 
ressauts    over    window   openings,    117 
(cut)  ;  court,  treatment  of  columns,  118. 
Palazzo   Girand    Torlonia,    112;    window 

opening,  north  Italian,  112,  149. 
Palazzo  Massimi,  facade  described,  114- 
116  (cut)  ;   wall   above  basement   un- 
broken by  pilasters  or  string  courses, 
114;    portico,    114,   115;    spacing    of 
columns  and    pilasters    of   basement, 
114;  window  openings,  115. 
Ronsard,  his  poem  on  Lescot  cited,  196. 
Roof,  timber,  built  over  early  domes,  10,  11. 
Rossellino,    his   use   of   the    orders   in   the 
Diiomo  of  Pienza,  42,  43;   his  work  on 
the  basilica  of  St.  Peter,  Rome,  47. 
Ruptures,  in  the  dome  of  Florence  cathedral, 
23,  24 ;  in  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's,  Rome, 
59,  60-63  (cut) ;  not  necessarily  alarming 
in  a  properly  constructed  vault,  62^. 
Rustication  of  masonry,  109. 

Salamanca,  cathedral  of,  dome,  how  it  ap- 
proaches and  differs  in  nature  from  a 
(ji)thic  vault,  57-59  (cuts). 

San  (jallo,  Antonio,  the  elder,  90  ;  his  work 
on  ch.  of  San  Biagio,  Montepulciano, 
Rome,  78-83;  ch.  of  Santissima  Annun- 
ziatta,  Arezzo,  83. 

San  Gallo,  Antonio,  the  younger,  his  design 
for  St.  Peter's,  Rome,  71 ;  Palazzo  P'ar- 
nese,  Rome,  116. 

San  Gallo,  Giuliano  da,  designed  Palazzo 
Gondi,  Florence,  107,  176;  leafage  of 
capital,  176  (cut). 


San  Giovanni,  Florence  Baptistery,  14,  16. 

Sanmichele,  Porta  del  Palio,  Verona,  125 
(cut);  Palazzo  Canalla,  Verona,  126; 
Palazzo  Pompei  alia  Vittoria,  Verona, 
126;  Palazzo  Bevilacqua,  Verona,  126, 
127  (cut). 

Sansovino  (Jacopo  Tatti),  his  predilection 
for  classic  forms,  119,  120;  library  of  St, 
Mark,  Venice,  121  (cut),  130;  his  at- 
tempt to  make  half  the  metope  fall  at 
the  end  of  the  frieze,  121, 122 ;  small  free- 
standing column  placed  on  each  side  of 
the  pier  to  bear  the  archivolt,  often 
spoken  of  as  an  invention  of,  123,  130, 
131  (cut)  ;  Loggetta  of  the  Campanile, 
Venice,  123;  his  use  of  a  form  of  col- 
umn claimed  by  De  I'Orme  as  his  own 
invention,  205. 

Scaffolding  said  to  have  been  employed  by 
Brunelleschi,  2i3. 

Scamozzi,  133,  134;  peculiar  form  of  com- 
pound window,  sometimes  called  his  in- 
vention, 134  (cut). 

Scrollwork,  of  facade  of  the  ch.  of  the  Gesri, 
Rome,  93. 

Sculpture,  on  buildings,  has  in  Gothic  art 
only  an  appropriate  architectural  char- 
acter, and  a  high  degree  of  excellence  in 
the  development  of  form,  167;  Greek,  is 
in  a  measure  independent  of  the  building 
on  which  it  is  placed,  167;  of  the  human 
figure  in  Renaissance  art,  has  little  proper 
architectural  character,  167;  relief  carv- 
ing of  the  Renaissance,  167-178  (cuts). 
See  Carving,  architectural,  of  the  Renais- 
sance. 

Sebastiano,  architect  of  ch.  of  Sant'  Agostino, 
Rome,  72. 

Serlio,  Regole  Generale  di  Architettura  di 
Sebastiano  Serlio,  442,  1962 ;  cited  on  the 
work  of  Bramante  on  St.  Peter's,  Rome, 
472,  49 ;  quoted  on  corner  pilasters,  79 ; 
cited  on  the  removal  of  the  entablature 
between  the  ressauts,  117  (cut)  ;  influence 
on  Lescot,  196 ;  his  column  practically 
the  same  as  that  claimed  by  De  I'Orme 
as  his  own  invention,  203  (cut). 

Sgrilli,  Discrizione  e  Studj  dell'  Insigne 
Fabbrica  di  S.  Maria  del  Fiore,  quoted, 

23- 
Siena,  Palazzo  Pubblico,  102. 
Soane   Museum,  John  Thorpe's   drawings, 

2i82,  221. 
Spavento,  church  of  San  Salvatore,  Venice, 

ISO- 
Spire,   Gothic,   far  removed  from  anything 

proper  to  classic  composition,  83. 
Steeples,    Wren's,    246;    are    the    outcome 

of    the   Renaissance    spire-like    towers, 

82. 
Strozzi,  Filippo,  no. 


268 


INDEX 


Stucco,  use  in  Renaissance  architecture,  32, 

132,  133- 
Syria,  St.  Simeon  Stylites,  use  of  tbe  free 
standing  column  under  the  archivolts, 
131  (cut)  ;  Basilica  of  Shakka,  form  of 
window  opening  reproduced  in  architec- 
ture of  the  Renaissance,  134. 

Tablets,  rectangular  in  fagade  surface,  74; 
ugly  shapes  of,  in  the  facade  of  The  Gesii, 
Rome,  95  (cut)  ;  of  Vignola,  95  (cut). 

Tatti,  Jacopo.     i'<r^  Sansovino. 

Thorpe,  Juhn,  his  plans  show  a  French  in- 
fluence, 218,  220;  little  is  known  of  him, 
2i8"^;  Kirby  Hall,  England,  218-220 
(cuts) ;  Longford  Castle,  221. 

Thrust,  the,  of  a  dome,  15I,  24,  52. 

Ties,  wooden  used  in  Gothic  buildings,  222. 

Tivoli,  temple  of  Vesta,  resemblance  of  the 
Tenipietto,  Rome,  to,  44,  45  (cut). 

Todi,  church  of  Santa  Maria  della  Consola- 
zione,  74-77  (cuts)  ;  the  scheme  is  Byzan- 
tine, 74,  77  ;  dome,  74,  75, 77 ;  interior,  75 
(cut) ;  orders,  75-77  (cut)  ;  piers,  75,  76; 
exterior,  77  (cut)  ;  similarity  between  the 
sacristy  of  San  Satiro,  of  Milan,  and,  140; 
between  cath.  of  Como  and,  144. 

Towers,  spire-like,  of  the  Renaissance,  81; 
scheme  based  on  the  Lombard  Roman- 
esque tower  and  the  mediaeval  cam- 
panile, 82;  of  ch.  of  San  Biagio  at 
Montepulciano,  78,  8i  (cuts)  ;  of  ch.  of 
Santo  Spirito,  Florence,  81,  82  (cut) ; 
Giotto's,  82. 

Triglyph,  problem  of  the  arrangement  of,  at 
the  end  of  the  frieze,  121,  122  (cuts) . 

Triumphal  arch  used  as  a  model  of  Renais- 
sance facades,  38,  39-43  (cuts). 

Vanvitelli,  his  placing  of  binding  chains 
around  the  dome  of  St.  Peter's,  Rome, 
62. 

Variety,  unmeaning,  different  from  that 
which  results  from  an  active  inventive 
spirit,  2iii. 

Vasari,  Le  Opere  di  Giorgio  Vasari  quoted, 
16;  cited  on  Brunelleschi's  account  of 
the  dome  of  Florence,  18I,  22I ;  cited,  33I, 
no;  cited  on  Alberti's  work,  35,  44, 107; 
cited  on  rebuilding  St.  Peter's,  Rome,  47; 
his  short-sighted  admiration  of  St.  Peter's, 
71;  quoted  on  Michelozzi,  105, 149;  cited 
on  the  Palazzo  Strozzi,  Florence,  106. 

Vault,  Gothic,  why  a  dome  cannot  have  the 
character  of  a,  20,  21,  56-59  (cuts). 

Vaults,  the  nature  of  the  construction  of  a 
circular-celled  vault  on  Gothic  principles, 
56-59  (cuts)  ;  of  the  chapel  of  the  Pazzi, 
Florence,  27,  28,  56;  ch.  of  San  Spirito, 
Florence,  34 ;  chapel  of  St.  Peter  Martyr, 
ch.  of  Sant'  Eustorgio,  Milan,  142. 


Venetian    Renaissance.      See    Renaissance, 

Venetian. 
Venice,  church  of  The  Redentore,  general 
scheme,  100  (cut)  ;    east   end,  100,  loi ; 
orders,  loi ;  fa9ade,  loi. 

Church  of  S.  Fantino,  151. 

Church  of  San  Francesco  della  Vigna 
fagade,  100. 

Church  of  San  Giorgio  Maggiore,  97 ; 
nave,  97,  98  ;  piers,  97,  98  (cut)  ;  orders 
raised  on  pedestals,  98,  99 ;  placed 
under  the  archivolts,  98 ;  entablature, 
98,  99,  loi ;  facade,  99  (cut),  loi. 

Church  of  Santa  Maria  Formosa  repro- 
duces features  of  St.  Andrea  of  Mantua 
with  details  of  the  character  of  the 
Lombardi,  153. 

Church  of  Santa  Maria  dei  Miracole,  151 
(cut),  156;  refinement  in  details,  151; 
fapade  a  marvel  of  excellence  in  me- 
chanical execution,  151,  152  (cut)  ; 
Lombard  blind  arcade  recalled  in 
decoration  of  the  facade,  151 ;  carving 
of  ear  of  barley  and  flower  stalks,  169 
(plate)  ;  carved  mask  from  a  pilaster, 
178  (cut). 

Church  of  St.  Mark,  piers  pierced  longi- 
tudinally and  transversely,  150  (cut). 

Church  of  San  Salvatore,  150, 151 ;  pecul- 
iar pier  supports  of  the  barrel  vaulting, 
150  (cut)  ;  use  of  an  attic  as  support  for 
vaulting,  151 ;  its  system  is  that  of  the 
ch.  of  St.  Mark,  151. 

Church  of  San  Zaccaria,  general  descrip- 
tion of  interior,  149,  150;  singular 
column  of  nondescript  character,  150 
(cut). 

Palaces  of  the  grand  canal,  finest  are  those 
of  the  later  mediaeval  period,  159. 

Palazzo  Contarini,  161 ;  details  of  fa9ade, 
161;  window  openings,  161  (cut); 
grouping  of  pilasters  of  three  different 
proportions  and  magnitudes,  161  (cut). 

Palazzo  Corner-Spinelli,  160  (plate)  ; 
window  openings,  mediaeval  features, 
incompleted  circle  in  the  tympanum 
space,  160;  pilasters,  panelling  of,  160. 

Palazzo  Cornaro,  description  of  the  front, 
124;  unequal  main  divisions  of  the 
front  overladen  with  heavy  orders,  162. 

Ducal  Palace,  east  side  of  the  court,  154 
(plate) ;  fafade  described  in  detail, 
154,  155 ;  window  openings  described, 
154,  155;  north  side  of  court,  window 
openings,  155  (cut)  ;  giant's  stair,  fine 
execution  of,  156;  arabesque  after 
Roman  model,  167  (cut)  ;  grotesque 
creatures  in  the  relief  of  the  Scala 
d'  Oro,  177  (cut). 

Palazzo  Grimani,  facade,  163. 

Palazzo  Pesaro,  163. 


INDEX 


269 


Palazzo  Valmarano,  133. 
Palazzo   Vendramini,  161 ;  full  orders  in 
all  three  stories,  161,  162 ;  grouping  of 
mediaeval  window  openings,  162;  bal- 
conies, 162;  disproportion  of  topmost 
entablature,  162. 
Library  of  St.  Mark,  121  (cut)  ;  arrange- 
ment of  the  metope  in  the  frieze,  121, 
122    (cuts);    orders,   122;    frieze  and 
balustraded  balconies,  123 ;  free  stand- 
ing column  under  the  archivolt  in  the 
order  of  the  upper  story,  123,  130. 
Loggetta  of  the  Campanile,  123. 
iicuola  di  San  Marco,  description  of  facade, 
156-158   (cut) ;    portal,  described,  un- 
reason of  its  composition,  156  (cut) ; 
carvings,  157. 
Scuola  di   San  Rocco,  fa9ade  described, 
158  (cut) ;  portal,  159 ;  window  open- 
ings with  mediaeval  features  and  others 
with  pseudo-Corinthian  colonnettes,  159 
(cut),  160. 
The  Zecca,  form  of  column  claimed  by 
De  rOrme  as  his  own  invention,  205. 
Verona,   church   of    San  Zeno,   porch   and 
portal,  146  (cut). 
Palazzo  Bevilacqua,  description  of  facade, 

126,  127  (cut). 
Palazzo  Canalla,  126. 
Palazzo  del  Consiglio,  163   (plate)  ;   pre- 
sents   a     mediaeval    broletto    scheme 
dressed  out  in  Renaissance  details,  163 ; 
in  respect  to  its  finest  qualities  it  be- 
longs to  the  Middle  Ages,  163. 
Palazzo  Pompei  alia  Vittoria,  126. 
Porta  del  Palio,  description  of  facades,  125 
(cut),  126. 
Vicenza,    Town    hall   portico   by    Palladio, 
130-132    (cut)  ;    use   of    free   standing 
columns    under    the    archivolts,    130; 
columns  of  the  great  orders  act  some- 
what as  buttresses,  131. 
Palazzo  Colleone-Porta,  133. 
Palazzo  Porta-Barbarano,  133, 
Palazzo  Valmarano,  133. 
Loggia  Bernarda,  133  (cut). 
Vignola,  /  Cinque  Ordine  d' Architettura,  84, 
85,92;  entablature  which  he  calls  his  own 
invention,    85    (cut)  ;    his    unclassic  and 
incongruous  combinations,  86,  95;  elimi- 
nates mediaeval   forms,  92;   tablet  from, 
95  (cut) ;  great  influence  of  his  writings, 
248  ;  ch.  of  Sant'  Andrea  di  Ponte  Molle, 
Rome,   86-89    (cuts),  92;    ch.   of  Santa 
Maria  degli  Angeli,  Assisi,  89;  ch.  of  the 
Gesii,     Rome,    91-95     (cuts) ;     Palazzo 
Caprarola,  near  Viterbo,  128. 
Violette-le-Duc,  S.    V.   ChUteau,  171I,  181I; 
Entretiens     stir     V  Architecture,      2078 ; 
quoted    on    French    architects     of    the 
Renaissance,  179I ;  quoted  on  ch&teau  of 


Chambord,  191 ;  quoted  on  De  I'Orme, 
200I ;  his  genius  more  scientific  than  ar- 
tistic, 200I;  quoted  on  the  chateau  of 
Charleval,  211,  212;  errs  in  his  reasoning 
in  his  discourse  on  Renaissance  archi- 
tecture, 211-213. 

Villani,  quoted,  2. 

Villari,  cited,  3I. 

Viterbo,  Palazzo  Caprarola,  near  Viterbo, 
general  description  of,  128-130 ;  a  source 
of  inspiration  to  later  architects  of  trans- 
alpine Renaissance,  130. 

Vitruvius,  85;  quoted  on  the  orders,  86-; 
taken  by  Palladio  as  his  master,  96,  97 ; 
later  Renaissance  architects  based  their 
practice  on  the  writings  of,  119;  cited  on 
meaningless  Roman  ornamental  designs, 
170I;  notion  that  the  Ionic  order  was  de- 
signed after  female  proportions,  derived 
from,  207I. 

Walpole,  Horace,  Anecdotes  of  Painting, 
226;  quoted  on  Inigo  Jones,  226,  229; 
quoted  on  faults  of  Jones's  facade  of  old 
St.  Paul'S;  London,  231,  232. 

Ware,  Isaac,  A  Complete  Body  of  Archi- 
tecture, 248I,  249I ;  quoted  on  the  rules 
of  ancient  architects,  248,  249. 

Wenz,  Paul,  Die  Kuppel  des  Domes  Santa 
Maria  del  Fiore  zu  Florence,  20I. 

Willis,  his  term  "  continuous  impost "  used, 
188I. 

Window  openings,  framed  by  structural 
members  without  structural  meaning, 
116 ;  a  peculiar  form  of  compound,  some- 
times called  an  invention  of  Scamozzi, 
134  (cut),  143;  the  same  form  occurs  in 
the  basilica  of  Shakka,  134  (cut)  ;  taper- 
ing jamb  shafts,  137  (cut),  142,  149; 
illogical  scheme  of,  which  became  char- 
acteristic of  Lombard  and  Venetian 
Renaissance  architecture,  148  (cut)  ; 
mediaeval  form  of  those  in  Venetian 
palaces,  159  (cut),  160,  162;  Lower 
Walterstone  Hall,  England,  illustrates 
Elizabethan  neo-classic  ornamentation, 
221  (cut)  ;  chateau  of  Azay  le  Rideau, 
France,  Flamboyant  Gothic  and  neo- 
classic  forms  combined,  186  (cut) ; 
chateau  of  Charleval,  France,  unmean- 
ing variation  of  details,  210,  2H  (cut); 
Palazzo  Bartolini,  Florence,  109  (cut) ; 
Palazzo  Guardagni,  Florence,  107;  the 
Quaratesi,  Florence,  106;  the  Riccardi, 
Florence,  mediaeval  in  their  larger  fea- 
tures, hut  with  tapering  jamb  shafts,  103 ; 
Palazzo  Rucellai,  Florence,  109  (cut)  ; 
Ospedale  Maggiore,  Milan,  165  (cut)  ; 
of  the  Certosa  of  Pavia,  tapering  jamb 
shafts,  137  (cut)  ;  Palazzo  Cancelleria, 
112   (cut) ;    of  Palazzo  Famese,  Rome, 


V]0 


INDEX 


framed  by  structural  members  without 
structural  meaning,  ii6  (cut) ;  Ducal 
Palace,  Venice,  east  side  of  court,  154, 
north  side,  pseudo-Corinthian  order  of, 
155  (cut) ;  Palazzo  Contarini,  Venice, 
grouping  of  the  pilasters,  161  (cut) ; 
Palazzo  Corner-Spinelli,  Venice,  mediae- 
val features,  incomplete  circle  in  the 
tympanum  space,  160;  Palazzo  Corneri, 
Venice,  124  (cut)  ;  Palazzo  Vendramini, 
Venice,  grouping  of,  in  the  bays  of  the 
fafade,  162;  Scuola  di  San  Rocco, 
Venice,  with  mediaeval  features  and  with 
pseudo-Corinthian  colonnettes,  159  (cut)  ; 
Palazzo  Bevilacqua,  Verona,  126,  127; 
Palazzo  Branzo,  Vicenza,  a  peculiar  form 
of  compound  window,  sometimes  called 
an  invention  of  Scamozzi,  134. 
Wren,  Sir  Christopher,  Parentalia,  or  Me- 


moir of  the  Family  of  the  Wrens,  232^  if. ; 
professor  of  astronomy  at  Oxford,  233; 
quotations  from  a  letter  written  during 
his  visit  to  Paris,  233;  quoted  on  his 
Sheldonian  theatre,  Oxford,  234  ;  ordered 
to  submit  designs  for  the  restoration  of 
old  St.  Paul's  cathedral,  London,  234;  his 
drawings  of  plans  for  the  new  structure, 
235-238  (cuts)  ;  building  of  the  present 
structure,  239-245  (cuts)  ;  his  scheme 
to  "  reconcile  the  Gothic  to  a  better 
manner,"  238,  243,  245 ;  he  learned  his 
art  on  the  scaffold  in  close  contact  with 
the  works,  239 :  his  churches  other  than 
St.  Paul's,  exhibit  a  medley  of  elements 
from  spurious  Gothic  to  pseudo-classic 
in  irrational  combinations,  245,  246;  his 
spires  are  hybrid  compositions  of  bar- 
baric character,  246. 


Development    and   Character   of 
Gothic  Architecture 

By  CHARLES  HERBERT  MOORE 

Second  Edition,  Rewritten  and  Enlarged.     With  Ten  Plates  in  Photogravure 
and  more  than  200  Illustrations  in  the  Text 

8vo.       Cloth.      $4.50,  net 


The  new  edition  embodies  a  large  amount  of  fresh  material  gathered  at  first  hand 
from  the  monuments.  A  considerable  number  of  early  Gothic  buildings  of  great 
importance,  hitherto  little  known,  have  been  examined  ;  and  much  new  light  has  thus 
been  thrown  upon  the  interesting  subject  of  the  early  Gothic  development.  A  new 
chapter  on  the  sources  of  Gothic  art  has  been  inserted  ;  the  other  chapters  have  been 
rewritten  and  much  new  matter  incorporated.  The  work  is  thus  much  improved 
both  as  an  exposition  of  the  nature  and  character  of  Gothic  art,  and  a  comparative 
illustration  of  the  various  pointed  systems  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

Many  new  illustrations  in  the  text,  and  a  considerable  number  of  full-page  plates, 
executed  in  the  best  manner  of  photographic  reproduction,  will  be  included. 

The  Nation  says  of  the  new  edition  : 

"The  treatise  has  evidently  been  remade  from  beginning  to  end,  the  old  material 
being  retained  only  so  far  as  it  was  found  to  meet  entirely  the  new  demands. 

"As  to  the  illustrations,  they  also  have  been  minutely  reconsidered,  and  the 
improvement  in  this  respect  is  even  more  striking  than  in  the  text.  .  .  . 

"Those  who  have  found  the  first  edition  of  Mr.  Moore's  work  valuable  will  find 
it  still  more  important  to  possess  the  second." 

"  We  welcome  Mr.  Moore's  book  with  unalloyed  satisfaction  ...  as  of  very  great 
importance  and  value.  ...  A  book  so  comprehensive,  so  compact,  so  clear  in  state- 
ment, and  so  interesting  in  the  treatment  of  its  great  subject  is  well  suited  not  only 
to  increase  the  general  knowledge  of  Gothic  architecture,  but  to  become  a  text-book 
for  special  students."  —  Amekica.n  Arciuteci"  and  Building  News. 

"  It  is  without  question  the  most  noteworthy  work  upon  architecture  yet  written 
in  America,  as  well  as  by  one  of  the  foremost  contributors  to  the  literature  of  the 
subject  which  has  appeared  in  any  country.  .  .  . 

"  Mr.  Moore's  book  is  an  honor  to  American  scholarship  and  investigation,  and 
deserves  the  widest  circulation  among  readers  who  possess  any  interest  in  what  he 
succeeds  in  making  a  most  interesting  subject."  —  Boston  Daily  Advektisek. 

"  While  the  more  appreciative  readers  of  this  volume  will  be  found  among  students 
of  architecture,  no  reader  of  taste  or  culture  will  find  its  pages  without  interest." 

—  The  Tkanscrmt,  Boston. 

"  A  very  intelligent  and  sufficiently  lucid  discussion  of  fundamental  principles  .  .  . 
distinguished  by  a  clear,  logical  precision  of  statement,  and  by  a  boldness,  and  not 
unfre(iuently  by  an  originality  of  deduction,  such  as  cannot  l)e  found  in  the  works  of 
Kuro])can  scholars  .  .  .  lucid  enough  to  commend  themselves  even  to  readers  unfa- 
miliar with  the  technical  side  of  the  subject.  To  such  readers,  also,  the  orderly 
development  of  the  argument,  the  fref|uent,  grajihic  illustrations,  .  .  .  and  above 
all,  the  exhaustive  index,  cannot  fail  to  serve  at  once  as  an  invitation  to  enter  upon 
a  charming  field  of  study,  and  an  inducement  to  stay  until  the  last  words  are  said." 

—  The  Atlantic  Monthly. 


THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 
64-66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


European    Architecture 


A   HISTORICAL   STUDY 


BY 


RUSSELL   STURGIS,    A.M.,   Ph.D.,    F.A.I. A. 

President  of  the    Fine  Arts  Federation  of  Netv    York ;  Post-President  of  the  Architectural 

League  of  New    Tori ;    Vice-President  of  the   National 

Sculpture  Society  ,•  etc. 


8vo.     Illustrated.    $4.00 


OUTLOOK 

"  To  the  literature  of  architecture  no  American  is  better  qualified  to  make 
a  contribution  of  lasting  value  than  Mr.  Russell  Sturgis." 

THE   ARCHITECTS'   AND    BUILDERS'    REVIEW 

"  Mr.  Sturgis  tells  his  readers  exactly  what  the  purpose  of  his  book  is,  and 
raises  no  expectations  that  are  not  fully  realized.  ...  It  cannot  be  too 
widely  known  or  too  carefully  studied.  .  .  .  Nothing  Mr.  Sturgis  can  say 
on  the  subject  of  architecture  can  fail  to  be  interesting  and  instructive.  .  .  . 
It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  this  single  work  forms  the  best  introduction  to 
the  serious  study  of  European  architecture  ever  published." 

THE   INDEPENDENT 

"In  Mr.  Sturgis's  'European  Architecture'  rare  good  taste,  simple  truth, 
and  great  knowledge  combine  to  satisfy  eye  and  mind." 


THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 
64-66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


A  DICTIONARY  OF  ARCHITECTURE  AND  BUILDING 

Biographical,    Historical,    and    Descriptive 

By   RUSSELL  STURGIS,    A.M.,   Ph.D. 

Fellow  of  the  American  Institute  of  Architects 

And  many  Architects,  Painters,  Engineers,  and  other  expert  Writers,  American  and  Foreign 

In  Three  Octavo  Volumes  — Sold  only  by  Subscription 
Cloth,  $18.00  net  per  set        Half  morocco,  $30.00  net  per  set 


COMMENTS   OF   THE  PRESS 


"  Ambitious  in  scope  and  ample  in  bulk,  the  present  work  bids  for  wide  acceptance 
among  the  general  as  well  as  the  technical  public.  It  is  practically  the  only  considerable 
effort  to  supply  encroaching  demands  for  a  compendium  which  shall  be  at  once  convenient 
as  to  form  and  complete  in  the  matter  of  contents.  The  aim  of  its  compilers  has  evidently 
been  to  strike  an  average  between  that  which  is  popular  and  that  which  is  for  the  specialist, 
and  in  this  they  have  shown  sagacity.  Edited  under  the  direct  supervision  of  Mr.  Russell 
Sturgis,  —  who  has  contributed  a  momentous  proportion  of  the  material,  —  the  work  has 
enlisted  the  services  of  some  sixty  current  authorities."  —  CRITIC. 

"Mr.  Russell  Sturgis  is  the  editor  of  this  important  work,  and  has  had  the  cooperation 
of  such  men  as  Dr.  Cleveland  Abbe,  Edward  Atkinson,  E.  H.  Blashfield,  Henry  Van  Brunt, 
.  .  .  and  others,  each  of  them  eminent  in  some  department  of  knowledge  rendering  his  aid 
valuable.  It  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  there  is  in  English  no  other  dictionary  of  archi- 
tecture, excepting  a  work  in  eight  volumes  said  to  have  been  begun  about  1850  and  to  have 
been  completed  only  ten  years  ago.  There  is  room,  therefore,  for  a  modern,  scholarly,  and 
reasonably  complete  work  of  this  class. 

"  The  present  volume,  the  first  of  the  three  proposed,  covers  the  letters  A  to  E,  inclusive. 
It  is  comprehensive,  concise,  although  sufficiently  full,  untechnical,  and  easily  used.  The 
desirable  line  between  too  scrupulous  terseness  and  too  much  elaboration  of  definition  or 
description  has  been  drawn  ordinarily  with  great  success.  There  is  no  hesitation  to  give 
space  for  desirable  comment,  as  in  what  is  written  under  '  Builder,'  for  inst.ince,  but  brevity 
has  been  kept  in  view  throughout  the  work,  and  its  cross-references  facilitate  its  use.  The 
tiles  are  in  heavy  type  and  at  once  catch  the  eye.  Illustrations,  numerous  and  appropri- 
ate, some  of  full-page  size,  abound,  and  all  in  all  the  work  will  meet  very  satisfactorily  a 
real  and  important  public  need."  —  CONGREGATIONALIST. 

"  Tlianks  to  Mr.  Russell  Sturgis  and  a  corps  of  competent  assistants,  we  now  have  in  '  A 
Dictionary  of  Architecture  and  Building  :  Biographical,  Historical,  and  Descriptive '  a  much 
more  valuable  work  than  could  have  been  hoped  for.  .  .  .  Several  things  are  at  once 
noticeable  about  this  work  —  the  terseness  and  lucidity  of  its  articles  and  definitions;  the 
extraordinary  range  of  its  subjects,  from  the  arch  of  Septimius  Severus  to  modern  apart- 
ment houses  and  tenements,  and  from  St.  Paul's,  London,  and  the  Doge's  palace  in  Venice, 
to  A  crib  for  hay  such  as  one  finds  in  rural  England,  and  a  peasant's  hut  in  Asia  Minor; 
the  beauty  of  the  illustrations,  and  particularly  the  readiness  with  which  they  elucidate  the 
accompanying  definitions  and  accounts;  and  the  elaborate  system  of  cross-references, 
through  which  a  glance  at  an  article  on  any  phase  of  a  given  subject  points  the  way  at  once 
to  accounts  of  other  related  terms  and  their  uses. 

"  Perhaps  the  thoroughly  modern  spirit  which  dominates  and  inspires  the  whole  work  is 
the  feature  that  distinguishes  this  book  most  strongly  from  the  works  in  other  languages 
which  the  seeker  for  definitions  hitherto  has  perforce  consulted.  The  writers  of  these  arti- 
cles are  scholarly  men,  but  they  are  something  more  than  scholars.  They  are  not  living  in 
the  past ;  they  are  doing  their  work  in  the  world  to-day,  and  their  point  of  view  and  their 
tone  is  a  most  satisfactory  and  practical  mixture  of  culture  with  the  recognition  of  the  needs 
of  the  average  American.  An  important  feature  of  this  work  will  be  the  series  of  articles  on 
the  typical  architecture  of  different  countries.  Some  of  those  in  the  present  volume  deal 
with  the  architectures  of  Australia,  Denmark,  and  England,  while,  to  judge  from  cross- 
references,  the  one  in  the  final  volume  on  the  architecture  of  the  United  States  will  be 
arnUitious,  elaborate,  and  inclusive.  The  connection  of  this  work  with  modern  building  is 
shown  by  the  two  long  articles  on  the  'Apartment  House"  and  'Electrical  Appliances.' 
Modern  edifices  are  as  seriously  considered  as  the  ancient  monuments  described  and  pic- 
tured by  VioUet-le-Duc.  .  .  .  Now  that  it  has  appeared,  this  dictionary,  many  of  whose 
articles  extend  to  the  dimensions  of  those  in  encyclopaedias,  becomes  indispensable  in  its 
field."  —  Boston  H  era  ld. 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY,  64-66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGiONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hiigard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  lllxary 

from  which  H  was  borrowed.  


HIKJ  MAR  1 9  W9t- 


12 


I£99 


UCLA-AUF»L 

NA  510  M78c 


L  005  859  966  3 


4 


\  , 


